From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Apr 16 21:26:36 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA13611 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Thu, 16 Apr 1998 21:26:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from sunny.bog.msu.su (sunny.bog.msu.su [158.250.20.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id EAA13584 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 1998 04:26:11 GMT (envelope-from dima@bog.msu.su) Received: from localhost (dima@localhost) by sunny.bog.msu.su (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA06187; Fri, 17 Apr 1998 08:24:44 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from dima@bog.msu.su) Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 08:24:42 +0400 (MSD) From: Dmitry Khrustalev To: "Daniel O'Callaghan" cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD parsing in Squid. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > I run squid 1.1.20 at FreeBSD 4.4. According to the response time return > from client, it is TEN TIMES SLOWER than I run it at SunOS v5. When I > compare the result from gprof, I find that squid spent considerably amount > of time (22.9%) in parseIntegerValue, decode_addr, aclParseIpData, > safe_inet_addr, storeDirClean, urlParse, parseHttpRequest and sscanf at ^^^^^^ FreeBSD sscanf %d, %u uses quads. This can be the reason. ( Just a guess, i have not looked at the actual squid code ). -Dima > FreeBSD while only 3.7% of time spent in the same trace of code. Can > anyone tell me why? > > Thanks. > Yee Man Chan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message