Ahh, their web page says something different (either that or I'm just reading it
incorrectly). This graph was under the section heading of, "Dynamic Play", so I
assumed it was a graph showing a 4KB dynamically generated file.
Now if this was a static test, then the only difference between the first test
and the last test was the number of ethernet controllers used... and look at the
performance difference:
Linux 4KB static pages, 1 CPU, 1 Eth: 960 requests/second
Linux 4KB static pages, 1 CPU, 2 Eth: 1100 requests/second
NT 4KB static pages, 1 CPU, 1 Eth: 950 requests/second
NT 4KB static pages, 1 CPU, 2 Eth: 2000 requests/second
Then again, maybe it's just a poor english translation :)
> i am getting 1-CPU performance of 3500 hits/sec (small static files) with
> a 'dumbed down' webserver-demo coded up by Zach Brown which uses
> sendfile() and Linux's async IO API. Apache 2.0 (judging from Dean
> Gaudet's plans) will be able to get such numbers as well.
Nice. I've been tracking Apache's two seperate development efforts (the apr and
mpm stuff) and it does look good, though PC Week said that Zeus (which I thought
used sendfile()) gave just about the same performance as Apache in their tests.
Jordan
-- Jordan Mendelson : http://jordy.wserv.com Web Services, Inc. : http://www.wserv.com- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/