2017-05-19 16:28 GMT+02:00 Christopher Schultz <ch...@christopherschultz.net >:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > Rémy, > > On 5/19/17 8:47 AM, Rémy Maucherat wrote: > > 2017-05-19 14:42 GMT+02:00 Christopher Schultz > > <ch...@christopherschultz.net > >> : > > > >> But here it's clear that the client wants to know "do I get a > >> performance benefit swapping-out JSSE for OpenSSL. I think we all > >> knew what the answer was. Jean-Frederick's slides from yesterday > >> I believe include such benchmarks as well (NIO/OpenSSL vs > >> NIO/JSSE vs APR/OpenSSL) . > >> > > > > I guess the answer is "obvious", but having numbers to back it is > > better. JF and myself have never tested without keepalive as we > > focused more on the cipher performance, so it was a good idea to do > > it. > > Oh, yes, of course. I had forgotten that your tests did not include > KeepAlives. > > A better real-world test for those benchmarks should be to have a very > limited number of KeepAlives allowed, since most clients don't make > 10k requests over a single KeepAlive connection... it's more like 2 - 20 > > Yes, with a more typical keepalive count, you get a better mix with the high performance cost of handshaking. IMO ab is never real world though, you only request one single resource. It's a good test when you're trying to optimize and/or have a measure of raw speed of a certain simple task, but that's it. Benchmarking is serious business [and it's also all lies obviously :) ]. Rémy
