Hey there,

On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Josh Chamas wrote:

> Robert Lagana wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is it possible to benchmark the server load with mod_ssl enabled on Apache?
> >
> > Is there particular software that can do this?
> >
>
> In perl, you could do this by scripting a quick benchmark
> with LWP & Crypt::SSLeay libraries. ( LWP loads Crypt::SSLeay
> on the backend for https URLs )
>
> Here's a crude command that will set 2 web clients hitting
> your SSL server at the same time:
>
> ]$ perl -MLWP::Simple -MBenchmark -e 'fork; timethis(25, sub { 
>get(qq(https://localhost/)); }); wait;'
> timethis 25: 11 wallclock secs ( 2.78 usr +  0.07 sys =  2.85 CPU) @  8.77/s (n=25)
> timethis 25: 11 wallclock secs ( 3.03 usr +  0.07 sys =  3.10 CPU) @  8.06/s (n=25)
>
> The timethis() stats aren't really relevant in this case, but
> it gave 50 requests done in 11 seconds.  Obviously, since the
> client was running on the same machine as the server, the servers
> real performance would be quite different by itself.

heh :-)

There is another solution out there (shameless plug);
   http://www.geoffthorpe.net/crypto/swamp/

This will also let you mess around with combinations of session resume
(attempts) from the client requests - something important if you're trying
to simulate more or less the profile of traffic you expect a server to be
hit with in real life. Hitting it with nothing but a barrage of SSL/TLS
session negotiations is doing little more than determining what it would
take to DoS your server, which is perhaps not the only information you're
looking for.

BTW: The README may be useful even if you don't want to use swamp - it's
online at;
   http://www.geoffthorpe.net/crypto/swamp/swamp-1.1.0/README

Cheers,
Geoff

-- 
Geoff Thorpe
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


______________________________________________________________________
Apache Interface to OpenSSL (mod_ssl)                   www.modssl.org
User Support Mailing List                      [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager                            [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to