you might want to run that from within EC2 to avoid network latency, then you might want to increase the concurrency (I believe you are currently only sending 1 request at a time). Finally, if your code is waiting on IO for 45ms per request, this is where your bottleneck is, not in the web server. If that's the case, you want to try to increase the concurrency to see when you hit the maximum amount of requests per processes available. Thin is single threaded and blocking, so if your response if slow because of a DB call for instance, 1.9 + Puma should give you a better throughput. Unicorn should also be able to fork more processes to handle the load (depending on your settings and the available resources), Rainbows is also an alternative web server based on unicorn and meant for slower response times. (it looks like, if you are really hitting your server, 50ms from your home connection is quite a good response time tho)
- Matt On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Dan Simpson <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess the question to ask is: Where is the bottleneck? It's worth > profiling a request to see where that 50.3ms is spent. > > --Dan > > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Ylan Segal <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Guys, >> >> Is anyone using anything other than thin on heroku cedar? >> >> I was trying to see if any of the above web servers has a significantly >> different performance, but I am finding it doesn't really seem to matter. >> >> I tried one of my real production apps (for a benchmark that is >> meaningful to me) on a staging server and tried to measure performance. >> >> I tried: >> >> - Thin (as suggested by heroku). >> - Unicorn (configuring for 3 workers) >> - Puma (as configured by default). >> >> After deploying with each server I tried using httperf like so: >> >> httperf --hog --server $URL --num-conn 1000 --ra 20 --timeout 5 >> >> The weird part, is that it seems that the performance is the same for all >> web servers: >> >> Thin: Request rate: 19.8 req/s (50.5 ms/req) >> Unicorn: Request rate: 19.9 req/s (50.3 ms/req) >> Puma:Request rate: 19.9 req/s (50.3 ms/req) >> >> Any ideas why I am not seeing a difference in the tests? I have several >> theories, but would like to hear what the group has to say. >> >> -- >> Ylan Segal >> [email protected] >> >> -- >> SD Ruby mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby >> > > -- > SD Ruby mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > -- SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
