Hi All,

We tested the dragonfly approach on Linux (RHEL 6.5 with kernel 3.13.9). We 
used the same testing environment for both our patch and the dragonfly patch. 
Here is what we found:

1. Our patch has 36% better performance (operations/sec) comparing to dragonfly 
patch.
2. Our patch has 53% lower response time comparing to dragonfly approach even 
at 36% higher throughput level.
3. Our patch can scale the CPU utilization and frequency to the max capacity 
while dragonfly patch cannot.
4. Our patch does not have any issues with "upgrade binary on the fly". 
However, dragonfly patch creates a spike in the response time during the 
upgrade. It also has lots of connection timeouts/losses with high load.

Above findings are based on Linux OS.

Thanks,
Yingqi

-----Original Message-----
From: nginx-devel-boun...@nginx.org [mailto:nginx-devel-boun...@nginx.org] On 
Behalf Of Lu, Yingqi
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 11:24 AM
To: nginx-devel@nginx.org
Subject: RE: [Patch] SO_REUSEPORT support from master process

One more comment from me: duplicate listen sockets in kernel is not a trivia 
thing to do and it may take long time before people can see it. Addressing it 
Nginx may not be as ideal as in kernel, but at least user can see the 
performance improvement sooner. In fact, we see up to 48% performance 
improvement on modern Intel system. Just my two cents.

Again, thanks very much for everyone for helping us review this.

Thanks,
Yingqi

-----Original Message-----
From: nginx-devel-boun...@nginx.org [mailto:nginx-devel-boun...@nginx.org] On 
Behalf Of Lu, Yingqi
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 10:05 AM
To: nginx-devel@nginx.org
Subject: RE: [Patch] SO_REUSEPORT support from master process

Hi Maxim,

Thanks for letting us know.

Our updated patch is located at 
http://forum.nginx.org/read.php?29,253446,253446#msg-253446 

It supposes to address all the style issues and fixes the restart and binary 
upgrade issues. This is just a FYI in case you are not aware of.

Thanks,
Yingqi

-----Original Message-----
From: nginx-devel-boun...@nginx.org [mailto:nginx-devel-boun...@nginx.org] On 
Behalf Of Maxim Dounin
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 5:59 AM
To: nginx-devel@nginx.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] SO_REUSEPORT support from master process

Hello!

On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 07:32:08PM +0000, Lu, Yingqi wrote:

> Dear All,
> 
> It has been quiet for a while on this patch. I am checking to see if 
> there is any questions/feedbacks/concerns we need to address?
> 
> Please let me know. Thanks very much for your help!

Apart from style/coding issues, I disagree with the whole approach.

As far as I understand the patch idea, it tries to introduce multiple listening 
sockets to avoid in-kernel lock contention.  
This is something that can be done completely in kernel though, and I see no 
reason to introduce any changes to nginx here.  

The approach previously discussed with Sepherosa Ziehau looks much more 
interesting.

--
Maxim Dounin
http://nginx.org/

_______________________________________________
nginx-devel mailing list
nginx-devel@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel

_______________________________________________
nginx-devel mailing list
nginx-devel@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel

_______________________________________________
nginx-devel mailing list
nginx-devel@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel

_______________________________________________
nginx-devel mailing list
nginx-devel@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel

Reply via email to