From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 12 18:30:10 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C49B16A403 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:30:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: from web30306.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web30306.mail.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.69.68]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BB9E413C45D for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:30:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from arne_woerner@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 41609 invoked by uid 60001); 12 Jan 2007 18:30:07 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=rz6dSswoaMEWizDunPfWxHD+IMsXVf47amxrMmjcmRGEY59hM4skBekV9/QGDDeFgsivcUyYCC9KOTHflsQij+t8hooXi5aHeMtllnLh29RhqJHfCOYenTXN+Rx8mqgtue3wRxSTJWi3XEXFcLFLVc2xyeQNzdPW6QydenGwwMs= ; Message-ID: <20070112183007.41607.qmail@web30306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: nUBoBRAVM1mVkLtzI2sM9_xALM1atPK0aSDZnt3dx4PnTMytKr3uMr9QHXR9Arli4nmOpk9WDxe7WCou3zaqXNWhqBFtXQoVba9w4JfZEr4E4SMV.VzaTWtEkujPNzH9UzSDgvxMwTvMgA6GQDIvK0s_qMkntQZPA4sjMIPYLy1cgGdEgV6eTiOwVIWc Received: from [85.212.6.114] by web30306.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:30:07 PST Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:30:07 -0800 (PST) From: "R. B. Riddick" To: Chuck Swiger In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: network perf : em driver ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:30:10 -0000 --- Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Jan 12, 2007, at 8:07 AM, R. B. Riddick wrote: > > As the "OP" (what is that exactly? again an animal?) mentioned: > > Apache performs > > worse than scp. > > Quick testing suggests that an Apache child process accumulates a > similar amount of CPU time transferring large files as scp when using > an SSL connection; if you access Apache via HTTP rather than HTTPS, > it uses much less CPU than scp does. > Hmm... CPU usage isnt all that counts... I can write an http server, that uses 0.1% CPU time and produces 800bit/sec traffic... :-) > > My memory tells me similar things... Remember: Apache is > > optimized for LINUX not necessarily for FreeBSD... > > Apache's been optimized to run quite well on a lot of platforms, > although it is somewhat heavy-weight compared with a webserver > oriented towards serving static files only. > I just cant find the thread about apache/thttpd (it was in freebsd-performance@, I think), and I dont have up-to-date hardware, and I am too lazy to compare Apache on FreeBSD to the theoretical maximum, some piece of software can reach on FreeBSD... Since these systems are nowadays so complex and difficult to compare, I would recommend benchmarks, that r tailored on and for the special box... Ideally one would use different boxes and test each with different OSes and different application-implementations, so that u can do an informed decision based on empirical data in the end (of course I know, that limited time and funding causes some pressure)... -Arne --- "Denny Crane, Denny, Denny, Denny ... Crane" (from "Boston Legal") "Get me Homer Landskirty" (from "Scary Movie 4") ____________________________________________________________________________________ No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail