Gabor Kovesdan <ga...@freebsd.org> writes: > Other than the functionality, when we replace something, it is also > important to do some benchmarks and assure that the performance is not > reasonably worse. Some time back I committed the error of not > carefully pass this requirement with BSD grep but so far it seems it > went fine with the recent BSD sort change. It would be nice to also > ensure this with the unbound change if it really happens.
What sort of benchmarks do you envision? Unlike named, unbound is intended to serve only one client (localhost) or a small number of clients (a SOHO). With that kind of load, one could be ten times slower than the other and you wouldn't notice, because other factors, like network latency, completely dwarf the time the nameserver itself spends servicing a request. (note that I fully expect unbound to hold its own on corporate networks with thousands of clients, but I doubt my boss is going to let me run performance comparisons on the university's network) DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
