On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:27:21AM -0700, Danek Duvall wrote: > [email protected] wrote: > > > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~johansen/webrev-16131/ > > I hadn't realized that we were already doing parallel connections and that > this would not be introducing them, but doubling them, but the change looks > fine. It looked from your analysis that 50 connections would be better > than 20; is 20 just a conservative number that will still perform quite > well?
We're not doing parallel connections, actually. When pipelining is enabled, all of the requests get sent over one connection. When pipelining is disabled, the multi handle will cache 5 connections per easy handle. This means that maximally, we'll have 100 connections open on the client side, but only 20 to any one host. 50 connections only yielded an additional improvement in high-latency situations. In the low-latency case, there was actually a small performance penalty for adding more connections after 20 until we hit the really big jump at 95-100. I was trying to choose a more conservative number, since the parallelization isn't computed dynamically yet. I also wondered if we really wanted 50 connections per-client to our pkg depots. -j _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
