Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 22:40:30 -0500 (CDT) From: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@americantv.com> To: aron@cs.rice.edu, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: paper on improving webserver performance Message-ID: <199907080340.WAA29430@free.pcs> In-Reply-To: <local.mail.freebsd-net/199907080323.WAA26783@cs.rice.edu> References: <local.mail.freebsd-net/Pine.BSF.3.95.990707201159.23943j-100000@current1.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <local.mail.freebsd-net/199907080323.WAA26783@cs.rice.edu> you write: > >> >> It's definitly interesting. >> The comment about having compared against timer wheels is especially >> interesting given that Garrett has been working on replacing the TCP >> timers with timer wheels... >> >> maybe he has some tricks up his sleave that win back some of the >> difference... Actually, if you recall my earlier posting, I had a hybrid approach that allowed using either the current approach, or a timing wheel approach. After a bunch of tests, it turns out that the timing wheel was faster, so I merged my code with Garrett's. >Perhaps the following would help. My implementation of timing wheels was >well optimized. To continue TCP to use integer variables, only a single event >was inserted into the timing wheel corresponding to all the TCP timers. This >event corresponded to the time that the earliest timer needed to fire. Further, >this event wasn't cancelled even if the TCP timers were. Thus TCP would set and >unset its timers by simply changing the integer variables. This seems to indicate that you still have the overhead where the timer fires, but no events are actually pending. -- Jonathan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199907080340.WAA29430>