Justin Erenkrantz <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Daniel Shahaf <[email protected]> wrote: >> Perhaps I wasn't clear. The traffic using ra_serf is 2.2 times as much >> as using ra_neon; see the (currently) last comment on the issue Philip >> links to. > > I definitely don't see that locally - I only see about a 20-25% gap - > which from looking at the traces appears to generally be due to the > extra PROPFIND requests. > > Here's what I see for a checkout of svn trunk - > http(s)://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/subversion/trunk > > Neon (HTTP): 17294674 bytes > Neon (HTTPS): 17543641 bytes > > Serf (HTTP): 21892977 bytes > Serf (HTTPS): 19399160 bytes > > The reason HTTPS for ra_serf is smaller is that Serf and OpenSSL is a > pretty optimized path based on network packets... -- justin
Those look like the numbers with mod-deflate in the path. Although mod-deflate reduces the traffic it pushes up the server CPU because serf is pushing so much more data through the compressor. It's not much of a selling point that serf only increases traffic by 20% if it also increases CPU. -- uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy http://www.uberSVN.com
