netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

      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).