Re: [Pdns-users] pdns-recursor performance

2008-08-05 Thread Leen Besselink
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 12:30:25AM -0700, Brad Dameron wrote:
 And you will see your response times drop from 1-2 seconds to milliseconds. I 
 did a lot of testing of this and pdns-recursor is definitely the best out 
 there.
  
 Brad 
 

Hi Brad,

Did you also test Unbound ( www.unbound.net ) ?

They say they are faster, they are a fairly new player in this field (version 
1.0.0 released May 20, 2008).

I can't find the graph. The graph I've seen shows PowerDNS and bind pretty
close together. Which I found a bit strange.

Even if they are faster, atleast they are keeping the title in the Netherlands
(PowerDNS and NLNetlabs are both dutch organisations). :-)

I've not used/tested it.
___
Pdns-users mailing list
Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com
http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users


RE: [Pdns-users] pdns-recursor performance

2008-08-05 Thread Brad Dameron
Thanks for the link. We also looked at NSD which is another good one. unbound 
appears to be threaded? That would offer the performance gains. Especially on 
the quad-core CPU's we use. However my current configuration launches multiple 
pdns instances in the forked mode each on a seperate IP using Foundry 
ServerIrons to load balance between IP's and machines. Seems to scale really 
well. I also saw another way of scaling based on a dnscache configuration where 
you have pdns instances point to other pdns instances as their root name 
servers. This caches asking caches which then ask the real root servers if none 
of them know. Appears to be a good scalable solution as well. 
 
What is echo I see listed on there?
 
Brad



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Leen Besselink
Sent: Tue 8/5/2008 1:44 AM
To: pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com
Subject: Re: [Pdns-users] pdns-recursor performance



On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:29:14AM +0200, Leen Besselink wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 12:30:25AM -0700, Brad Dameron wrote:
  And you will see your response times drop from 1-2 seconds to milliseconds. 
  I did a lot of testing of this and pdns-recursor is definitely the best out 
  there.
  
  Brad
 

 Hi Brad,

 Did you also test Unbound ( www.unbound.net ) ?

 They say they are faster, they are a fairly new player in this field (version 
 1.0.0 released May 20, 2008).

 I can't find the graph. The graph I've seen shows PowerDNS and bind pretty
 close together. Which I found a bit strange.


I did find the graphs:

http://www.unbound.net/documentation/ripe56_unbound_02.pdf

 Even if they are faster, atleast they are keeping the title in the Netherlands
 (PowerDNS and NLNetlabs are both dutch organisations). :-)

 I've not used/tested it.
___
Pdns-users mailing list
Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com
http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users


___
Pdns-users mailing list
Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com
http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users


Re: [Pdns-users] pdns-recursor performance

2008-08-05 Thread Leen Besselink
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:29:14AM +0200, Leen Besselink wrote:
 On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 12:30:25AM -0700, Brad Dameron wrote:
  And you will see your response times drop from 1-2 seconds to milliseconds. 
  I did a lot of testing of this and pdns-recursor is definitely the best out 
  there.
   
  Brad 
  
 
 Hi Brad,
 
 Did you also test Unbound ( www.unbound.net ) ?
 
 They say they are faster, they are a fairly new player in this field (version 
 1.0.0 released May 20, 2008).
 
 I can't find the graph. The graph I've seen shows PowerDNS and bind pretty
 close together. Which I found a bit strange.
 

I did find the graphs:

http://www.unbound.net/documentation/ripe56_unbound_02.pdf

 Even if they are faster, atleast they are keeping the title in the Netherlands
 (PowerDNS and NLNetlabs are both dutch organisations). :-)
 
 I've not used/tested it.
___
Pdns-users mailing list
Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com
http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users


[Pdns-users] pdns-recursor performance

2008-08-04 Thread Adam Cassar

A big congrats on the performance of the pdns-recursor.

We recently switched from bind8 to bind9 (because of the recent dns 
vulnerabilities) then to pdns-recursor (because of performance and 
stability issues).


After the upgrade to pdns-recursor cpu utilisation dropped to 10% from 
50% with bind9!

___
Pdns-users mailing list
Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com
http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users