From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Oct 24 21:38:47 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5210037B4C5 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 21:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alumni.caltech.edu ([63.201.176.178]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with ESMTP id <0G2Y00G4ZY6GH0@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 21:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 21:45:14 -0700 From: Dan Kegel Subject: Re: kqueue microbenchmark results To: Jonathan Lemon Cc: chat@freebsd.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: dank@alumni.caltech.edu Message-id: <39F6655A.353FD236@alumni.caltech.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en References: <20001024225637.A54554@prism.flugsvamp.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Johnathan, Thanks for running that test for me! I've added your results (plus a cautionary note about microbenchmarks and a link to your site) to http://www.kegel.com/dkftpbench/Poller_bench.html If you haven't already, you might peek at the discussion on linux-kernel. Linus seems to be on the verge of adding something like kqueue() to Linux, but appears opposed to supporting level-triggering; he likes the simplicity of edge triggering (from the kernel's point of view!). See http://boudicca.tux.org/hypermail/linux-kernel/2000week44/index.html#9 Thanks, Dan Jonathan Lemon wrote: > I recently stumbled across a message you posted asking for > microbenchmarks on kqueue. While I do think that microbenchmarks > are partially misleading, I did run them on my machine for > various numbers of connections, with varying number of active > connections. The results are shown below. > > The results dovetail with what I expect: kqueue scales depending > on the number of active connections that it sees, not with the > total number of connections. > > Also, I presented a paper/talk at the recent BSDCon 2000, these > are available at http://www.freebsd.org/~jlemon if you're interested. > -- > Jonathan > > This is on a single processor 600Mhz Pentium-III with 512MB of > memory, running FreeBSD 4.x-STABLE: [ 1 active pipe ] > cache[10:13pm]> ./Poller_bench 5 1 spk 100 1000 10000 30000 > pipes 100 1000 10000 30000 > select 54 - - - > poll 50 552 11559 35178 > kqueue 8 8 8 8 [ 10 active pipes ] > cache[10:13pm]> ./Poller_bench 5 10 spk 100 1000 10000 30000 > pipes 100 1000 10000 30000 > select 100 - - - > poll 95 571 11697 35499 > kqueue 52 52 55 56 [ 100 active pipes ] > cache[10:13pm]> ./Poller_bench 5 100 spk 100 1000 10000 30000 > pipes 100 1000 10000 30000 > select 542 - - - > poll 528 1091 12440 36530 > kqueue 574 592 623 702 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message