From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Wed Mar 8 04:00:45 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A09CD02E33 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 04:00:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emz@norma.perm.ru) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D202000 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 04:00:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emz@norma.perm.ru) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 4140CD02E30; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 04:00:45 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F2E0D02E2F; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 04:00:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emz@norma.perm.ru) Received: from elf.hq.norma.perm.ru (mail.norma.perm.ru [IPv6:2a00:7540:1::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.norma.perm.ru", Issuer "Vivat-Trade UNIX Root CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 966D61FFD; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 04:00:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emz@norma.perm.ru) Received: from [192.168.243.2] ([192.168.243.2]) (authenticated bits=0) by elf.hq.norma.perm.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v2840a2H063308 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:00:37 +0500 (YEKT) (envelope-from emz@norma.perm.ru) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=norma.perm.ru; s=key; t=1488945637; bh=eNsHPoYoIzGkWMtMuB6HhZQZiWU1JUHDkpjntSU4jTc=; h=To:From:Subject:Date; b=d0LRCbr8Sn5PFzQoxy0j30frGReeRTL9jW2EzzsuZUtVmamVSWy5YBPjsGgmpJiA5 jvUVg56+mR8jdocMhtR1o1EoJeaaVmG1SYc8VaN6SJcfjyhO/BGGjN/h794DhBdCrJ 8wSEuTH8Hz0TAdbSyXZCk/ujOlvpUACHsRLnAUhk= To: "stable@freebsd.org" , freebsd-net From: "Eugene M. Zheganin" Subject: about that DFBSD performance test Message-ID: Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:00:34 +0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 04:00:45 -0000 Hi. Some have probably seen this already - http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/2017-March/313254.html So, could anyone explain why FreeBSD was owned that much. Test is split into two parts, one is nginx part, and the other is the IPv4 forwarding part. I understand that nginx ownage was due to SO_REUSEPORT feature, which we do formally have, but in DFBSD and Linux it does provide a kernel socket multiplexor, which eliminates locking, and ours does not. I have only found traces of discussion that DFBSD implementation is too hackish. Well, hackish or not, but it's 4 times faster, as it turns out. The IPv4 forwarding loss is pure defeat though. Please not that although they use HEAD it these tests, they also mention that this is the GENERIC-NODEBUG kernel which means this isn't related to the WITNESS stuff. Please also don't consider this trolling, I'm a big FreeBSD fan through the years, so I'm asking because I'm kind of concerned. Eugene.