On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I posted kevent/epoll benchmarks and related design issues too many > > times both with handmade applications (which might be broken as hell) > > and popular open-source servers to repeat them again. > > numbers are crutial here - and given the epoll bugs in the evserver code > that we found, do you have updated evserver benchmark results that > compare epoll to kevent? I'm wondering why epoll has half the speed of > kevent in those measurements - i suspect some possible benchmarking bug. > The queueing model of epoll and kevent is roughly comparable, both do > only a constant number of steps to serve one particular request, > regardless of how many pending connections/requests there are. What is > the CPU utilization of the server system during an epoll test, and what > is the CPU utilization during a kevent test? 100% utilized in both > cases?
With 8K concurrent (live) connections, we may also want to try with the v3 version of the epoll-event-loops-diet patch ;) - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
