From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <andre@sneakymustard.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.1.3
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 571A7BC6D
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:29:57 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAABp3sEfIuX5Bh2dsb2JhbACLXIRgAQEBCAopmgw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,335,1199660400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="22508591"
Received: from mta18.f3.k8.com.br ([200.185.126.65])
  by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 12 Feb 2008 01:29:56 +0100
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtpa.f3.k8.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5F52800191
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:29:53 -0200 (BRST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at k8.com.br
Received: from smtpa.f3.k8.com.br ([127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (mta18.f3.k8.com.br [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with LMTP id DCOkuiWXfqjp for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>;
	Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:29:53 -0200 (BRST)
Received: from [201.8.247.135] (201008247135.user.veloxzone.com.br [201.8.247.135])
	by smtpa.f3.k8.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98B3B280017F
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:29:53 -0200 (BRST)
Subject: Nethttpd_plex performance question
From: Andre Nathan <andre@sneakymustard.com>
To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:20:20 -0200
Message-Id: <1202775620.5316.7.camel@homesick>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam: no; 0.01; ocamlnet:01 model:01 workload:01 workload:01 -thread:01 compilation:01 -thread:01 plex:98 nathan:98 plex:98 1,000:98 1,000:98 req:98 req:98 threads:01 

Hello

I'm trying to write a simple webserver using Nethttpd_plex from the
ocamlnet package. I did a simple benchmark using the examples provided
in the distribution (easy_daemon.ml and netplex.ml). Both examples
create static pages, but the netplex version shows worse performance,
which I think is odd because it uses a multi-process model, while
easy_damon is a single process handling all requests.

I'm running "ab" (apache's benchmark tool), doing 1,000 connections, 100
concurrently. Here are the results:

- easy_daemon:
Requests per second:    1699.87 [#/sec] (mean)

- netplex:
Requests per second:    591.22 [#/sec] (mean)

[netplex's results actually vary a lot, sometimes reaching about 1,000
req/s but sometimes also being as low as 300 req/s. On average it seems
to be around 600 req/s]

I'm using the following configuration for netplex's workload_manager:

    workload_manager {
      type = "dynamic";
      max_jobs_per_thread = 1;
      min_free_jobs_capacity = 30;
      max_free_jobs_capacity = 50;
      max_threads = 256;
    };

Also, even though I'm using Netplex_mp.mp (multiple processes, instead of
multiple threads), compiling with -thread gives me a performance gain
(the numbers above are for a compilation with the -thread flag). Is that
expected?

Does anyone have any tips for improving netplex's performance? I believe
that with the right settings it should be able to outperform the simpler
daemon easily, since it's using multiple processes.

Thanks in advance,
Andre