Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2001

It keeps the original formatting. numero = 36847
interpreted = N
texte = I'd sure like to see a NT result on a dual 550 as well.FWIW, this is data SmithMicro should have made public years ago. I sureappreciate your work Dale.On 6/28/01 5:52 PM, The Defendant Dale LaFountain Confessed:>> On 6/28/01 3:38 PM, The Defendant Dale LaFountain >> Confessed:>> >>>> On 6/28/01 12:34 PM, The Defendant Dale LaFountain >>>> Confessed:>>>> >>>>> >>>>> OSX is NOT always slower. Running a single instance of my template,>>>>> OSX is faster by 50%. It's only when multiple requests occur>>>>> simultaneously that OSX crawls, even in comparison to OS9/Webstar on>>>>> the same hardware.>>>>> >>>>> Isn't it possible that some inefficiencies exist in the way>>>>> webcat/osx handles threads that could cause this massive difference>>>>> in performance? Do other applications that run on both OSX and Linux>>>>> have this problem, or is this a problem specific to webcat? If not>>>>> in webcat, then the problem should be reported to the Darwin group>>>>> and to Apple as a bug.>>>>> >>>>> If this is an inherent flaw in (current) OSX, I would strongly>>>>> discourage anyone from using webcat/osx for busy webcat-driven sites.>>>>> It certainly can't keep up with our (relatively simple) testing suite>>>>> using Netsplat.>>>>> >>>>> -Dale>>>> >>>> Dale, What hardware are you using?>>>> >>>> I just did a new install on a 533 DP. I will have a gig and a half of ram>>>> in it by next week. If you like, I'm more than willing to run your test>>>> suite and see how it compares to linux/ or single proc machine.>>>> >>>> >>>> -- Aaron Lynch>>> >>> We're testing on a dual 533 G4 as well, with 512 mb ram.>>> >>> You're welcome to test, but I'm guessing you'll see the same results.>>> >>> -Dale>> >> Thanks for the info. What are you using on the Linux side?>> I am not in any way needing to get every ounce of performance out of this>> particular box. It will be pretty low volume. But I'm curious just the>> same. It will be interesting to see if the situation changes as X matures.>> >> >> -- Aaron Lynch> > It's a dual P3-550 running Redhat 7.0 and a software mirrored disk.> With the performance increase in 10.0.4, I'm hopeful that this> performance gap will resolve itself soon (fingers crossed).> >> >> Can you post the tests you did - I would be interested to run them on my OSX>> Server 1.2 box to compare speeds. Will post findings back to the list.>> >> Also - can you define 'load' to the list.>> >> Thanks>> Alain> > We define load as 5 or more simultaneous requests, as requested by> the Netsplat traffic simulation app.> > We put together a test suite that covered several areas: cpu> intensive no databases, db intensive searches, and db intensive> replace/appends. Each of these tests is configurable in intensity> (1-3 nested searches, 10-10000 results), all configurable in the url> so as to run different sets of templates through Netsplat.> > We also just took a variety of pages from our live e-commerce site> (www.tfaw.com) and starting hitting them with 10 splats at a time.> The performance sucks on OSX when the number of splats is above 2,> but is acceptable on OS9. I'm setting up an even faster linux box> shortly (dual p3-933) to do more testing.> > I'm also working on a summary of our findings, which covers OS9, OS10> Server 2.0, and Linux versions of webcat. I'll post a link to an> archive of our test suites in a couple days.> > -Dale-- A good scapegoat is almost as good as a solution.-------------------------------------------------------------This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list .To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://search.smithmicro.com/ Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Aaron Lynch 2001)
Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Dale LaFountain 2001)
Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Alain Russell 2001)
Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Aaron Lynch 2001)
Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Dale LaFountain 2001)
Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Aaron Lynch 2001)
Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Alain Russell 2001)
Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Dale LaFountain 2001)
Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Le Pham 2001)
macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load (Dale LaFountain 2001)

I'd sure like to see a NT result on a dual 550 as well.FWIW, this is data SmithMicro should have made public years ago. I sureappreciate your work Dale.On 6/28/01 5:52 PM, The Defendant Dale LaFountain Confessed:>> On 6/28/01 3:38 PM, The Defendant Dale LaFountain >> Confessed:>> >>>> On 6/28/01 12:34 PM, The Defendant Dale LaFountain >>>> Confessed:>>>> >>>>> >>>>> OSX is NOT always slower. Running a single instance of my template,>>>>> OSX is faster by 50%. It's only when multiple requests occur>>>>> simultaneously that OSX crawls, even in comparison to OS9/Webstar on>>>>> the same hardware.>>>>> >>>>> Isn't it possible that some inefficiencies exist in the way>>>>> webcat/osx handles threads that could cause this massive difference>>>>> in performance? Do other applications that run on both OSX and Linux>>>>> have this problem, or is this a problem specific to webcat? If not>>>>> in webcat, then the problem should be reported to the Darwin group>>>>> and to Apple as a bug.>>>>> >>>>> If this is an inherent flaw in (current) OSX, I would strongly>>>>> discourage anyone from using webcat/osx for busy webcat-driven sites.>>>>> It certainly can't keep up with our (relatively simple) testing suite>>>>> using Netsplat.>>>>> >>>>> -Dale>>>> >>>> Dale, What hardware are you using?>>>> >>>> I just did a new install on a 533 DP. I will have a gig and a half of ram>>>> in it by next week. If you like, I'm more than willing to run your test>>>> suite and see how it compares to linux/ or single proc machine.>>>> >>>> >>>> -- Aaron Lynch>>> >>> We're testing on a dual 533 G4 as well, with 512 mb ram.>>> >>> You're welcome to test, but I'm guessing you'll see the same results.>>> >>> -Dale>> >> Thanks for the info. What are you using on the Linux side?>> I am not in any way needing to get every ounce of performance out of this>> particular box. It will be pretty low volume. But I'm curious just the>> same. It will be interesting to see if the situation changes as X matures.>> >> >> -- Aaron Lynch> > It's a dual P3-550 running Redhat 7.0 and a software mirrored disk.> With the performance increase in 10.0.4, I'm hopeful that this> performance gap will resolve itself soon (fingers crossed).> >> >> Can you post the tests you did - I would be interested to run them on my OSX>> Server 1.2 box to compare speeds. Will post findings back to the list.>> >> Also - can you define 'load' to the list.>> >> Thanks>> Alain> > We define load as 5 or more simultaneous requests, as requested by> the Netsplat traffic simulation app.> > We put together a test suite that covered several areas: cpu> intensive no databases, db intensive searches, and db intensive> replace/appends. Each of these tests is configurable in intensity> (1-3 nested searches, 10-10000 results), all configurable in the url> so as to run different sets of templates through Netsplat.> > We also just took a variety of pages from our live e-commerce site> (www.tfaw.com) and starting hitting them with 10 splats at a time.> The performance sucks on OSX when the number of splats is above 2,> but is acceptable on OS9. I'm setting up an even faster linux box> shortly (dual p3-933) to do more testing.> > I'm also working on a summary of our findings, which covers OS9, OS10> Server 2.0, and Linux versions of webcat. I'll post a link to an> archive of our test suites in a couple days.> > -Dale-- A good scapegoat is almost as good as a solution.-------------------------------------------------------------This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list .To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://search.smithmicro.com/ Aaron Lynch

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Re: macosx 1 process, linux N processes, macosx chokes under load

2001

Top Articles:

Related Readings: