On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I rebuilt using latest HEAD of Serf and SVN (no patches applied) and
> re-ran the tests using a 1.7 serf client and both a 1.6 and 1.7 SVN
> server.
>
> While the server was configured according to your recommendations for
> KeepAlive, I did
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 23:15, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> On 05/16/2011 07:52 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> One thing I am a little confused about, but maybe it is a question for
>> C-Mike. When Serf is used, the number of HTTP requests does not go
>> down very much. 81,938 -> 80,928 I imagine th
On 05/16/2011 07:52 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> One thing I am a little confused about, but maybe it is a question for
> C-Mike. When Serf is used, the number of HTTP requests does not go
> down very much. 81,938 -> 80,928 I imagine this is because Serf
> already did not do all of the PROPFIND no
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
> wrote:
>> Are you by chance using SSL?
>>
>> I'm seeing something like a 2x perf drop on ra_serf with SSL to an SSL
>> server on the other side of the US from where I am now. But, ove
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> This patch should fix the memory leak. As I mentioned in a follow-up,
> we can discuss in Dublin or Berlin if there is a better way to solve
> this dangling filter reference...but, this will do the trick and
> should be back-portable to
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> Are you by chance using SSL?
>
> I'm seeing something like a 2x perf drop on ra_serf with SSL to an SSL
> server on the other side of the US from where I am now. But, over
> HTTP, ra_serf is pretty close to ra_neon. (And, the server is
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> For Neon, I think it is significant. In my case, 1.7 Neon issued 6,308
> fewer HTTP requests. My latency is .2 seconds. So that lopped around
> 21 minutes off the total test time when comparing Neon to Neon. I
> realize with Serf it is le
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> Hmm. More specifics on your configuration would be helpful if I am to
> try to reproduce your setup. Serf version? (0.7.2 or higher would be
> needed to avoid the Nagle issue.) OS (client & server)?
Serf trunk @ HEAD
Client is Wind
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
> wrote:
>>> Wasn't the patch for mod_deflate? And just to fix the memory leak
>>> when a client that does not support gzip connects?
>>
>> Are you by chance using SSL?
>
> No.
Hmm. More
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
>> Wasn't the patch for mod_deflate? And just to fix the memory leak
>> when a client that does not support gzip connects?
>
> Are you by chance using SSL?
No.
> I'm seeing something like a 2x perf drop on ra_serf with SSL to an SSL
> se
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>>> I re-ran the results with your latest changes and posted the new numbers.
>>
>> Is that with the commit as well as the
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>>> I re-ran the results with your latest changes and posted the new numbers.
>>
>> Is that with the commit as well as the
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> I re-ran the results with your latest changes and posted the new numbers.
>
> Is that with the commit as well as the patch I posted (but did not commit)?
Just the commit.
Wasn't
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I re-ran the results with your latest changes and posted the new numbers.
Is that with the commit as well as the patch I posted (but did not commit)?
Thanks! -- justin
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> The story using Serf is not as good. There are a few places where it
>> is fastest, namely merge. But there are other cases where it is
>> dramatically slower. The number of HTT
[ adding dev@httpd ]
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:18, Justin Erenkrantz
> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>>> Unfortunately huge memory leak in mod_deflate/mod_dav prevents
>>> enabling gzip on compression on p
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> This patch will also halve the amount of data that ra_serf retrieves
> for the basic benchmark test (28MB down to 13MB on the wire)...but,
FWIW, ra_neon sends:
Accept-Encoding: gzip
Accept-Encoding: svndiff1;q=0.9,svndiff;q=0.8
Accept-E
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> r1102173 will help slightly when there are lots of checkouts as
This patch will also halve the amount of data that ra_serf retrieves
for the basic benchmark test (28MB down to 13MB on the wire)...but,
what's rather odd is that the svndi
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> It would be great! Since I'm not familiar with this part of codebase
> and cannot fix it myself.
The quick-and-dirty fix is to set the no-gzip environment variable
within the filter before mod_deflate disconnects itself.
Re-architecting the
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:18, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
>> Unfortunately huge memory leak in mod_deflate/mod_dav prevents
>> enabling gzip on compression on production servers, especially on
>> Windows where single process mode is used:
>> ht
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote:
> Unfortunately huge memory leak in mod_deflate/mod_dav prevents
> enabling gzip on compression on production servers, especially on
> Windows where single process mode is used:
> http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2009-08/0274.shtml
*shrug*
Sound
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 10:12, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>> The story using Serf is not as good. There are a few places where it
>> is fastest, namely merge. But there are other cases where it is
>> dramatically slower. The number of HTTP
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> The story using Serf is not as good. There are a few places where it
> is fastest, namely merge. But there are other cases where it is
> dramatically slower. The number of HTTP requests with Serf is 80,990.
> Looking at the numbers, it se
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 03:40, Mark Phippard wrote:
> I ran the benchmark tests again using latest trunk for server and
> client. The numbers are interesting. See them here so you can see
> table formatting:
>
> https://ctf.open.collab.net/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.csvn/wiki/HTTPv2
>
> Using
I ran the benchmark tests again using latest trunk for server and
client. The numbers are interesting. See them here so you can see
table formatting:
https://ctf.open.collab.net/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.csvn/wiki/HTTPv2
Using Neon, performance is improved across the board. In some cases,
s
25 matches
Mail list logo
