On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 15:58 -0800, vigna wrote: > Oh, well, I'm sorry, I'm not really a network person :). I meant that we want > to keep 20K connections busy and transferring data while respecting > politeness, not to keep them open in the TCP sense. My fault. > >
Try reducing the number of concurrent connections from 20k to, say, 2k and you may be surprised to find out that a smaller number of connections can actually chew through the same workload faster. If the JVM spends less time switching between contexts (be it thread context switching or switching channels in a i/o selector) it is more likely to spend more time actually doing something useful like reading and processing data. So, it is _really_ that necessary to keep 20k connections open at the same time? Oleg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
