Re: [squid-dev] Sad performance trend

2016-09-12 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 09/12/2016 09:38 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote: > On 7/09/2016 5:43 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: >> On 09/06/2016 08:27 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote: >>> On 27/08/2016 12:32 p.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 v3.1 32% 38% 16% 48% 16+ 9% v3.3 23% 31% 14% 42% 15% 8%

Re: [squid-dev] Sad performance trend

2016-09-12 Thread Amos Jeffries
On 7/09/2016 5:43 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: > On 09/06/2016 08:27 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote: >> On 27/08/2016 12:32 p.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: >>> W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 >>> v3.1 32% 38% 16% 48% 16+ 9% >>> v3.3 23% 31% 14% 42% 15% 8% >>> v3.5 11% 16% 12% 36% 7% 6% >>> v4.0 11%

Re: [squid-dev] Sad performance trend

2016-09-12 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 09/12/2016 07:25 AM, Kinkie wrote: > > On 27/08/2016 12:32 p.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: > >> W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 > >> v3.1 32% 38% 16% 48% 16+ 9% > >> v3.3 23% 31% 14% 42% 15% 8% > >> v3.5 11% 16% 12% 36% 7% 6% > >> v4.0 11% 15% 9% 30% 14% 5% >

Re: [squid-dev] Sad performance trend

2016-09-12 Thread Kinkie
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Alex Rousskov < rouss...@measurement-factory.com> wrote: > On 09/06/2016 08:27 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote: > > On 27/08/2016 12:32 p.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: > >> W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 > >> v3.1 32% 38% 16% 48% 16+ 9% > >> v3.3 23% 31% 14% 42% 15% 8% >

Re: [squid-dev] Sad performance trend

2016-09-06 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 09/06/2016 08:27 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote: > On 27/08/2016 12:32 p.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: >> W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 >> v3.1 32% 38% 16% 48% 16+ 9% >> v3.3 23% 31% 14% 42% 15% 8% >> v3.5 11% 16% 12% 36% 7% 6% >> v4.0 11% 15% 9% 30% 14% 5% > That trend goes all the way

Re: [squid-dev] Sad performance trend

2016-09-06 Thread Amos Jeffries
On 27/08/2016 12:32 p.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: > Hello, > > Factory ran a bunch of micro-level Polygraph tests, targeting > several Squid subsystems: header parsing, connection management, and SSL > (but no SslBump). We tested a few Squid versions going back to v3.1: > > W1 W2 W3