Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Jun 1999 12:32:20 +0200 | From | Matthew Wilcox <> | Subject | Re: FTP benchmark proposal |
| |
On Mon, Jun 28, 1999 at 04:42:59PM +0800, David Luyer wrote: > > Larry McVoy wrote: > > > So I wouldn't worry too much about making the test realistic. if you > > > can set up a work load that has 6000 sockets going at the server in > > > parallel, I suspect that it will stress the server just fine. It's when > > > you try to do the load through a few sockets that all the timing enters > > > into the equation. Yeah, I'm sure the tests will have to be played > > > with a bit, but the first step is to just do it and see what we get. > > > I'll call VA tomorrow and see if they are interested. Red Hat is also > > > setting up such a lab on the East Coast. > > > > of course, with 6000 connections you can't just use one ftp daemon > > per connection. > > I thought the 4192 process limit was gone with the latest kernels? > > Granted, you'd probably want to be using an ftp daemon which is quite efficient > (eg, internalizes 'ls'), and probably want to run a front-end cache which > serves multiple connections if possible, but doing it with 6000 processes > would be an interesting test of how Linux could handle such things. (hmm, > hopefully an ftp daemon which doesn't touch too much RAM in every process > too...)
Sounds rather like hoser ftpd, brought to you by Zach `phhttpd' Brown (and others). There was a WIP on this at LinuxExpo and you can find it at http://www.zabbo.net/hftpd/
-- Matthew Wilcox <willy@bofh.ai> "Windows and MacOS are products, contrived by engineers in the service of specific companies. Unix, by contrast, is not so much a product as it is a painstakingly compiled oral history of the hacker subculture." - N Stephenson
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |