From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Feb 17 14:37:32 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E5937B402; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:37:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from pool0152.cvx21-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.192.152] helo=mindspring.com) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16cZvf-0005WD-00; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:37:07 -0800 Message-ID: <3C703089.AD03554B@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:36:57 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thomas Hurst Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org, hackers@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: in-kernel HTTP Server for FreeBSD? References: <20020217143343.41758.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> <20020217163045.GB90303@voi.aagh.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Thomas Hurst wrote: > * Dag-Erling Smorgrav (des@ofug.org) wrote: > > Hiten Pandya writes: > > > Is there any In-Kernel HTTP Server for FreeBSD, like there is kHTTPD > > > for Linux? > > > > God forbid! Lots of hack value, sure, but not something you'd > > seriously consider for production use. > > Don't functions like FreeBSD's zero-copy sendfile() provide similar > performance benefits without the massive security issues? > > If the remaining speed "hog" of switching to userspace to process the > request itself is causing noticable bottlenecks, I think that's a sign > you need more Pentium than the service needs moving to the kernel :) Not actually. If you have followed the khttpd work at all, then you'll know that Ingo has actually done some admirable work in it. Basically, the entire fast path, including the TCP stack, is small enough that the whole thing fits into the CPU cache itself, without any cache misses. It's actually very fast, considering (there are ways to make it faster that are actually more applicable to the FreeBSD approach, and which would take Linux a lot of work, even if they started from the QLinux base). For static content, such as the images and other content minus the main (non-static) page itself, it's quite a significant win for "first hits", which comprise the majority of HTTP traffic. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message