From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: "Pádraig Brady" <P@draigBrady.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: auto recycling of TIME_WAIT connections
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:23:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46E57D88.4000602@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46E51BDC.10907@draigBrady.com>
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
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-10 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-07 9:21 auto recycling of TIME_WAIT connections Pádraig Brady
2007-09-07 17:04 ` Rick Jones
2007-09-10 10:26 ` Pádraig Brady
2007-09-10 17:23 ` Rick Jones [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=46E57D88.4000602@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=P@draigBrady.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).