I know, i just read over lighttpd and other server who uses epoll/kqueue
and all emphasize usage of advanced polling systems. So my goal was to
check if epoll alone adds any performance, i tested server hitting wrong
url, so server responded with 404 in both cases.
Last time i tested lighttpd and naviserver with returning static file
and lighttpd also uses sendfile which is faster than user-spave
read-send operation fastpath uses. Also, naviserver uses generic
filters/urlspace mechanism which is slower than direct file return in
lighttpd so i am aware that we are not designed to be extremely fast in
returning static files.
Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
Am 23.01.2007 um 16:54 schrieb Vlad Seryakov:
I was playing with epoll and changed driver to see if performance will
be better with it. Using ab utility i actually got worse performance
with epoll, i suspect may be i implemented it not very effectively.
Perhaps we should split the processing in chunks and
measure how much % of time each chunk requires.
Then we'd know better what knobs to adjust?
I recall you telling something about 8000 vs. 2000
req/sec in favour of lighthttpd? Well, thats 4 TIMES.
Obviously, there is something much deeper that is different
in the design. I could not imagine epoll() usage is the
key. It must be something else!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel
--
Vlad Seryakov
571 262-8608 office
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.crystalballinc.com/vlad/
