Christian,

Thanks for knowing the list know!

Martin

Baribeau, Christian wrote:
> Allo Martin!
> 
> Found the problem. It was with the two Windows XP platforms used during the 
> test (combination of anti-virus and monitor software).
> 
> A fresh install of XP Windows SP3 on two other machines proved that there was 
> no performance issue along.
> 
> Merci.
> 
> Christian
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Sustrik
> Sent: April 18, 2010 7:40 AM
> To: 0MQ development list
> Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Out-of-the-box zeromq Unexpected Low Performance on 
> Windows
> 
> Allo Christian,
> 
>> We tried a combination of large message sizes (up to 17000 bytes) and
>> large number of message (1000, 5000, 10000) but the local_thr.exe did
>> not finish and display the stats. Further investigation (Windows'
>> perfmon tool and task manager) indicated that a large number of messages
>> seem to be dropped at the remote_thr.exe side before reaching "wire". In
>> our test setup, the two machines are directly connected together (i.e.
>> no switches, no routers). With this setup, I would expect that all
>> messages are sent and received assuming that two machines have similar
>> CPU and network capacity.
> 
> A sanity check: Are you starting local_thr before remote_thr?
> 
> Throughput test is based on PUB/SUB sockets (not an ideal option) and
> PUB/SUB socket semantics is that of radio transmission. PUB (remote_thr)
> publishes messages and in nobody is listening, they are simply dropped.
> 
>> We also tried this same test with two Windows Server 2003 based machines
>> and a combination of Windows Server 2003 and XP machines (all Windows OS
>> are 32-bit version). In all cases we obtained similar results as the
>> original test on two XP machines. A quick code walkthrough and network
>> cable test did not reveal anything suspicious. I assume that the values
>> defined in the platform.hpp and config.hpp files are a good start (i.e.
>> only change them when necessary).
>>
>> So, the hardware seems ok. The source code seems ok. The test setup
>> seems ok.
>>
>> Could we have missed configuring a setting/flag/#ifdef/#define during
>> the build process on Windows using MSVC2008 Express?
> 
> No. It should work out of the box.
> 
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> 
> This e-mail from Ultra Electronics Holdings plc and any attachments to it are 
> confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you 
> have received it in error please notify the sender and delete it from your 
> system. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy it or use it 
> for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. 
> All communications may be subject to interception or monitoring for 
> operational and/or security purposes. Please rely on your own virus checking 
> as the sender cannot accept any liability for any damage arising from any bug 
> or virus infection. Ultra Electronics Holdings plc is a company registered in 
> England and Wales, registration number 2830397. The address of its registered 
> office is 417 Bridport Road, Greenford, Middlesex, UB6 8UA.
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev

_______________________________________________
zeromq-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev

Reply via email to