From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 1 16:07:00 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3E581065675 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:07:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tevans.uk@googlemail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C5598FC19 for ; Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:06:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tevans.uk@googlemail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 30so2615172ugs.39 for ; Mon, 01 Dec 2008 08:06:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:cc :in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version :x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=0wyzVrsnFS7SRkWTtEwRGAaEdnbUHGV1jMQPptulbVQ=; b=C/Wn4EGsyg89JEQPcMpqCXaUdQ2Wc8JBD6ZRIG/f/+nogf0XPCOFgBk3M6BiygQc6h zbeisAOmp1SNOZ+sARHVjFcuwYrXL/e0c5DCqcP77MSWvhPXtO/A//v0qmlGln1AZbCk EQ5J5eb94k5GIE7RaPjMYobJ646Aez8XhaNjo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=tQ4i1McyLKkOpoe/XEhJt5Dl4HKlixYuxiKmV6vdgCn7UhHu6dk2oIdhR1/QRuxGE/ yxXglZQKPULsaI34i3JKx5Y4QmjY7WQb3ubkpTv3v0V3h+vRNADcAiqT4E9n8NP9CUrG VeRuv04h+P5Jlqnpqyr/Kn7JxhQnYny6Chdww= Received: by 10.67.30.4 with SMTP id h4mr3465657ugj.28.1228146066640; Mon, 01 Dec 2008 07:41:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?127.0.0.1? (83-244-213-91.cust-83.exponential-e.net [83.244.213.91]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o30sm8597881ugd.52.2008.12.01.07.41.04 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 01 Dec 2008 07:41:05 -0800 (PST) From: Tom Evans To: Paulo Fragoso In-Reply-To: <4933EC58.5030204@nlink.com.br> References: <4933EC58.5030204@nlink.com.br> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 15:41:19 +0000 Message-Id: <1228146079.4196.26.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 7.1 tcp problem (syncache)? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:07:00 -0000 On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 10:53 -0300, Paulo Fragoso wrote: > Hi, > > We was using one machine with FreeBSD 6.4-RELEASE running > apache-worker-2.2.3 + mysql, this server can answer high request from > one client using ab: > > > {client}$ ab -n 2000 -c 1000 http://system_using_6.4-RELEASE > ... > Benchmarking ***** (be patient) > Completed 200 requests > Completed 400 requests > Completed 600 requests > Completed 800 requests > Completed 1000 requests > Completed 1200 requests > Completed 1400 requests > Completed 1600 requests > Completed 1800 requests > Finished 2000 requests > ... > {client}$ > > > Using other hardware whit FreeBSD 7.1-PRERELEASE running > apache-worker-2.2.9_5 + mysql, we have a poor result: > > > {client}$ ab -n 2000 -c 1000 http://system_using_7.1-PRERELEASE > ... > Test aborted after 10 failures > > apr_connect(): Invalid argument (22) > {client}$ > > > Looking for a problem on new server log we found: > > kernel: TCP: [client]:50197 to [server]:80 tcpflags 0x4; > syncache_chkrst: Spurious RST without matching syncache entry (possibly > syncookie only), segment ignored > kernel: TCP: [client]:53845 to [server]:80 tcpflags 0x4; > syncache_chkrst: Spurious RST without matching syncache entry (possibly > syncookie only), segment ignored > kernel: TCP: [client]:53845 to [server]:80 tcpflags 0x4; > syncache_chkrst: Spurious RST without matching syncache entry (possibly > syncookie only), segment ignored > > All sysctl and apache conf are same on both server, is there a tcp > problem with FreeBSD 7.x? > > Paulo Fragoso. > Just to rule it out, have you tried testing using a more robust tool than ab? ab is generally disliked by the apache devs I've met. Does it still fall over using something like siege[1] or flood[2]? Cheers Tom [1] http://www.joedog.org/JoeDog/Siege [2] http://httpd.apache.org/test/flood/