We re-run the tests with concur. The result were better:
Test with rule drop: no noticeable change, around 650kqps, guess this is network or stack limit Test with rule REFUSED: dnsdist from rpm: ~450 Kqps dnsdist-concur: ~530kqps 17% improvement Test with answer from cache: 1 dnsdist from rpm 12 listeners: ~130 kqps 3 dnsdist from rpm 6 listeners each: ~370kqps 1 dnsdist-concur 12 listeners ~170 kqps 1 dnsdist-concur 20 listeners ~170 kqps 3 dnsdist-concur 6 listeners each ~450 kqps Hope this help. Thanks ! On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:03 PM, bert hubert <bert.hub...@powerdns.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 05:44:06PM -0300, Nico wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Thanks for answering!. > > I'm not pretending to be anonymous. > > Mi name is Nicolas Baumgarten and I do infrastructure support . > > Hi, welcome! Thanks. > > > One dnsdist process, whith 12 listeners, small cache, and all cached > queries > > can't get more than 120/140 kqps on our config. > > > > Now we just tried to run 3 instances of dnsdist, with almost the same > > config and 6 listeners each, > > and we obtained 360/380 kqps, that's a linear increment. > > Indeed - the goal of the dnsdist-concur branch is to get a single dnsdist > to > be (nearly) as fasst as 6 dnsdsists on the same machine. > > > I'm happy to share my results, what else I can send you? > > Please let us know what your results are with dnsdist-concur, we have one > measurement that is very good, but more would be welcome. > > Bert >
_______________________________________________ dnsdist mailing list dnsdist@mailman.powerdns.com https://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/dnsdist