network perf : em driver ?
R. B. Riddick
arne_woerner at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 12 10:30:10 PST 2007
--- Chuck Swiger <cswiger at mac.com> 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.
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)...
"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.
More information about the freebsd-performance