Ion Badulescu wrote: > > 2.4.1-pre10+zerocopy, using read()/write(): 18.3%-29.6% CPU * why so >much variance? The variance is presumably because of the naive read/write implementation. It sucks in 16 megs and writes out out again. With a 100 megabyte file you'll get aliasing effects between the sampling interval and the client's activity. You will get more repeatable results using smaller files. I'm just sending /usr/local/bin/* ten times, with ./zcc -s otherhost -c /usr/local/bin/* -n10 -N2 -S Maybe that 16 meg buffer should be shorter... Yes, making it smaller smooths things out. Heh, look at this. It's a simple read-some, send-some loop. Plot CPU utilisation against the transfer size: Size %CPU 256 31 512 25 1024 22 2048 18 4096 17 8192 16 16384 18 32768 19 65536 21 128k 22 256k 22.5 8192 bytes is best. I've added the `-b' option to zcc to set the transfer size. Same URL. - - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (noth... Trond Myklebust
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (noth... David Lang
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy ... David S. Miller
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly s... David Lang
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly s... David S. Miller
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly s... David Lang
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly s... Jeff Barrow
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly s... David S. Miller
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly s... James Sutherland
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do with EC... Ion Badulescu
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do wi... Andrew Morton
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to do wi... jamal
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing to d... Ion Badulescu
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (nothing ... jamal
- Re: sendfile+zerocopy: fairly sexy (noth... Ion Badulescu
- Still not sexy! (Re: sendfile+zeroc... jamal
- Re: Still not sexy! (Re: sendfi... Ingo Molnar
- Re: Still not sexy! (Re: sendfi... jamal
- Re: Still not sexy! (Re: sendfi... Ingo Molnar
- Re: Still not sexy! (Re: sendfi... jamal
- Re: Still not sexy! (Re: sendfi... Malcolm Beattie