From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Feb 18 18:54: 5 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9986B37B404 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2002 18:54:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from peter3.wemm.org ([12.232.27.13]) by rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020219025402.PZEM1147.rwcrmhc52.attbi.com@peter3.wemm.org> for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 02:54:02 +0000 Received: from overcee.wemm.org (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by peter3.wemm.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g1J2s2s35143 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2002 18:54:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1B013A9A; Mon, 18 Feb 2002 18:54:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Mike Silbersack Cc: Hiten Pandya , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference) In-Reply-To: <20020218134544.C48587-100000@patrocles.silby.com> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 18:54:01 -0800 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20020219025401.C1B013A9A@overcee.wemm.org> 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 Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote: > > > hi all, > > > > As to conclude this thread (for me.), I have come to the decision of > > actually starting a project for making a BSD Licensed in-kernel HTTPd > > server. The project will be on SourceForge.net. > > > > As you all know, that when starting a project, a name is needed for > > project; I completely out of ideas, and I have literally no creative > > skills. :) > > If you want to be really useful, I have a better first step for you. :) > > Common wisdom seems to be that Apache is slow, other httpds are faster, > custom ones are fastest. However, I don't think I've actually seen any > comparisons since this one of thttpd vs others: > > http://www.acme.com/software/thttpd/benchmarks.html > > Before starting work on a kernel httpd, you might wish to run similar > benchmarks (with perhaps only 5 different httpds) to see what the current > performance of FreeBSD is; it may turn out that some limitation in the TCP > stack is hit even by userland httpds, and your effort would be better > spent on fixing that first. The problem is that our threads implementation sucks. The moment that thttpd has to do an actual disk read on freebsd, the whole thing comes to a screeching halt. Threaded http servers do not stand up to real-world loads on freebsd, unless there are very specially constructred scenarios in place.. ie: everything is in ram, no FS calls ever block, etc. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message