Performance of freeBSD 5.1

[Petri Helenius]

Did you disable INVARIANTS and WITNESS when running the tests?

Pete

TeJun Huh wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I've been conducting performance tests using simple HTTP proxies and
>web polygraph <http://www.web-polygraph.org/>.  Web polygraph is
>believed to generate realistic Internet load (high number of sessions,
>many idle, req rate independent of resp rate, and so on).  I built
>several equivalent HTTP proxies using various concurrency mechanisms
>and comparing those on linux and freeBSD.
>
> The following result is obtained on p4 xeon 2.4g (UP kernels).
>Custom version of Kqueue is used on Linux.  FreeBSD 5.1 is updated to
>the latest cvs tree three weeks ago (due to thread stability issues)
>and compiled with GENERIC option.
>
>	FreeBSD				Linux
>	Select		Kqueue		Select		Kqueue
>rps	400		500		500		2500
>
> I feel something is very wrong with FreeBSD kqueue result.  Used
>tuning parameters are
>
>* Loader tunables
>
>kern.maxusers="512"
>kern.ipc.maxsockets="200000"
>kern.ipc.nmbclusters="51200"
>kern.ipc.nmbufs="102400"
>net.inet.tcp.tcbhashsize="65536"
>
>* Sysctls
>
>sysctl -w net.inet.ip.portrange.first=1024
>sysctl -w net.inet.ip.portrange.last=65535
>sysctl -w kern.ipc.somaxconn=1024
>sysctl -w kern.maxfiles=200000
>sysctl -w kern.maxfilesperproc=200000
>sysctl -w kern.threads.max_threads_per_proc=100000
>sysctl -w kern.threads.max_groups_per_proc=8000
>
> As soon as the test machine becomes available, I'm gonna run tests on
>freeBSD 4.8 and compare the results.  Any suggestions are welcomed.
>
>P.S. Please don't forget to CC me. TIA.
>
>  
>