Re: [naviserver-devel] Driver with epoll

[Vlad S. <vl...@cr...>]

I know, i just read over lighttpd and other server who uses epoll/kqueue 
and all emphasize usage of advanced polling systems. So my goal was to 
check if epoll alone adds any performance, i tested server hitting wrong 
url, so server responded with 404 in both cases.

Last time i tested lighttpd and naviserver with returning static file 
and lighttpd also uses sendfile which is faster than user-spave 
read-send operation fastpath uses. Also, naviserver uses generic 
filters/urlspace mechanism which is slower than direct file return in 
lighttpd so i am aware that we are not designed to be extremely fast in 
returning static files.

Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:
> Am 23.01.2007 um 16:54 schrieb Vlad Seryakov:
> 
>> I was playing with epoll and changed driver to see if performance will
>> be better with it. Using ab utility i actually got worse performance
>> with epoll, i suspect may be i implemented it not very effectively.
> 
> 
> Perhaps we should split the processing in chunks and
> measure how much % of time each chunk requires.
> Then we'd know better what knobs to adjust?
> 
> I recall you telling something about 8000 vs. 2000
> req/sec in favour of lighthttpd? Well, thats 4 TIMES.
> Obviously, there is something much deeper that is different
> in the design. I could not imagine epoll() usage is the
> key.  It must be something else!
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> naviserver-devel mailing list
> nav...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel
> 

-- 
Vlad Seryakov
571 262-8608 office
vl...@cr...
http://www.crystalballinc.com/vlad/