Some very early very unscientific performance numbers on unix socket connector in head with haproxy.
This is using siege over localhost. So that is HTTP/1.0 with no keep-alive on the same machine hammering on a hello world servlet. Insert all the usual disclaimers here about this being a very poor benchmark. Connectors were: 8080 HTTP direct 8443 HTTPS direct 8888 HTTP haproxy/unixsocket in tcp mode with proxy prototol 8843 HTTPS haproxy/unixsocket in tcp mode with proxy protocol here are the early results: gregw@Tile440: ~ [2016] siege -c 100 -b http://localhost:8080/ ** SIEGE 3.0.8 ** Preparing 100 concurrent users for battle. The server is now under siege...^C Transactions: 329921 hits Availability: 100.00 % Elapsed time: 22.86 secs Data transferred: 328.80 MB Response time: 0.00 secs Transaction rate: 14432.24 trans/sec Throughput: 14.38 MB/sec Concurrency: 59.76 Successful transactions: 329921 Failed transactions: 0 Longest transaction: 15.02 Shortest transaction: 0.00 gregw@Tile440: ~ [2017] siege -c 100 -b http://localhost:8888/ ** SIEGE 3.0.8 ** Preparing 100 concurrent users for battle. Transactions: 256987 hits Availability: 100.00 % Elapsed time: 24.47 secs Data transferred: 256.11 MB Response time: 0.00 secs Transaction rate: 10502.12 trans/sec Throughput: 10.47 MB/sec Concurrency: 12.53 Successful transactions: 256987 Failed transactions: 0 Longest transaction: 15.03 Shortest transaction: 0.00 gregw@Tile440: ~ [2018] siege -c 100 -b https://localhost:8443/ ** SIEGE 3.0.8 ** Preparing 100 concurrent users for battle. Transactions: 1016 hits Availability: 100.00 % Elapsed time: 24.10 secs Data transferred: 1.01 MB Response time: 2.20 secs Transaction rate: 42.16 trans/sec Throughput: 0.04 MB/sec Concurrency: 92.82 Successful transactions: 1016 Failed transactions: 0 Longest transaction: 3.94 Shortest transaction: 0.84 gregw@Tile440: ~ [2019] siege -c 100 -b https://localhost:8843/ ** SIEGE 3.0.8 ** Preparing 100 concurrent users for battle. Transactions: 8312 hits Availability: 100.00 % Elapsed time: 23.74 secs Data transferred: 8.28 MB Response time: 0.22 secs Transaction rate: 350.13 trans/sec Throughput: 0.35 MB/sec Concurrency: 75.73 Successful transactions: 8312 Failed transactions: 0 Longest transaction: 3.01 Shortest transaction: 0.01 So proxying HTTP is ~40% slower than direct. To be expected! HTTPS direct really really suxs, specially for this test mode of 1 small request per connection. HTTPS haproxy is still slow in this mode, but almost an order of magnitude better than direct! I hope to soon do some tests with a better test client. But if you want faster SSL, then this looks a promising direction. cheers -- Greg Wilkins <[email protected]> CTO http://webtide.com
_______________________________________________ jetty-users mailing list [email protected] To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jetty-users
