Re: [bug-myserver] task #9307: Propose to improve GNU MyServer Throughput and Reliability

[Giuseppe Scrivano]

Alexandru Iancu <address@hidden> writes:

> On the other hand, as I said in that paper, up until now, optimizations were 
> made 
> in application software like this sendfile OS feature while using this new 
> transport 
> we are trying to improve the performance other places: at transport layer.

Yes but SCTP can take advantage from the sendfile optimization too in
the same way TCP does.

Without sendfile you have (assuming the file is not cached):

file system -> kernel space -> user space -> network.

with sendfile it is:

file system -> kernel space -> network.


> On the other hand this feature is marginal to our server because it&#39;s not 
> available on 
> windows and used just by HTTP(S).

I think FTP could use it too, are there any reason to don't use it?

> Did you measure into an real world environment how myserver&#39;s performs 
> using 
> sendfile vs. not using this feature? Or do you know studies that show how 
> much 
> gain ones can have using sendfile instead read/send? Because I think in 
> Internet
> the real server&#39;s botleneck is not the processor&#39;s power but the 
> number of connections 
> the server(as a whole: user and kernel spaces) can handle concurrently. 
> SCTP helps me to handle more connections concurrently.

I don't have numbers too but when I started to use sendfile for HTTP I
saw big differences.

> So, I&#39;m optimistic about using SCTP even without sendfile.

Thought it can be better to have both :)

Have you already wrote any test case for SCTP that I can use as starting point?

Thanks,
Giuseppe