dave at compsoc.com
Fri Sep 15 11:33:29 IST 2000
On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, It appears John P . Looney said.......
> > Example: Apache-1.3.12, with kernel 2.2.16, downloading a 5k file gave an
> > overall requests/sec of 690.62. The best I've gotten out of aolserver,
> > with kernels 2.2.14-5.0 & 2.4.0-test8, is 49.98, and even at that it only
> > completed 29991 out of the 50000 it was supposed to do, before hitting the
> > max time I set.
> I honestly don't know what you are doing wrong...in my tests, with simple
> "hello world" type script things, I was getting ~10 times the performance
> of Apache on a 128Mb machine. What sort of "concurrent connections" are
> you using ? Anything more than 300 is asking for trouble...though I've not
> ever seen it dropping connections.
For this round of testing the conncurrent connections was held at 5, while
we adjusted other factors.
The only thing that we could think of, is that Aolserver was trying to be
a little too "intelligent" when serving out our test files. The files we
were using were just dd'ed from /dev/zero, and apache & kHttpd had no
problems firing them out. But when we tried to get Aolserver to serve
them, it was prompting us to download them. Adding a .txt extension,
solved that problem.
We ran some more tests this morning, and we do seem to be getting
differing (but better performance) out of it now.
Filename - Size - Requests/sec - Transfer Rate (kb/sec)
index.html 1689 917.40 1742.14
foo.html 30 1094.74 260.55
up.gif 164 1128.39 420.89
Seems a little all over the place.
Anyways, we're finished this round of testing for the moment. I'll let you
know how Aolserv handles under FreeeBSD and if we see any drastic change
in performance. And regrarding Aolservers performnce, we also found this,
Seems under his test, that Apache out performed Aolserver.
Cheers for the help,
More information about the ILUG