Network performance comparison as of today.
sepherosa at gmail.com
Mon Mar 6 17:59:21 PST 2017
I have updated the pdf a bit according to various feedbacks. Graphs stay same.
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Sepherosa Ziehau <sepherosa at gmail.com> wrote:
> Some profiling seems not well generated, here is the raw pictures:
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Sepherosa Ziehau <sepherosa at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Since so many folks are interested in the performance comparison, I
>> just did one network related comparison here:
>> The intention is _not_ to troll, but to identify gaps, and what we can
>> do to keep improving DragonFlyBSD.
>> According to the comparison, we _do_ find one area DragonFlyBSD's
>> network stack can be improved:
>> Utilize all available CPUs for network protocol processing.
>> Currently we only use power-of-2 CPUs to handle network protocol
>> processing, e.g. on 24 CPUs system, only 16 CPUs will be used to
>> handle network protocol processing. It is fine for workload involving
>> userland applications, e.g. the HTTP server workload. But it seems
>> forwarding can enjoy all available CPUs. I will work on this.
>> Tomorrow Will Never Die
> Tomorrow Will Never Die
Tomorrow Will Never Die
More information about the Users