Pádraig Brady wrote:
Rick Jones wrote:
This was an issue over a decade ago with SPECweb96 benchmarking. The
initial solution was to make the explicit bind() calls and not rely on
the anonymous/ephemeral port space. After that, one starts adding
additional IP's into the mix (at least where possible). And if that
fails, one has to go back to the beginning and ask oneself exactly why a
client is trying to churn through so many connections per second in the
first place.
right. This is for benchmarking mainly.
Sane applications would use persistent connections,
or a different form of IPC.
All the more reason to go the "add more client IP's" path then. It
gives you more connections per second, and gives you a much broader
umber of "client" IP's hitting the server which will be more realistic.
That is one thing I like very much about polygraph (based on what I've
read) - it's use of _lots_ of client IPs to better simulate reality. I
think other web-oriented benchmarks should start to include that as well
for there are stacks which do indeed make "decisions" based on whether
or not a destination is perceived to be "local" or not.
rick jones
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
