Shane Kerr wrote:
> FTP Bencharoos,
>
> I don't know if everybody has already seen this or not, but the
> following article on benchmarking various OS's is somewhat interesting
> in the good description of the various server software architectures:
>
> http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0107/0107a/0107a.htm
>
> I thought the following graphic was particularly telling:
>
> http://www.sysadminmag.com/articles/2001/0107/0107a/0107a_f3.htm
>
> It claims the asynchonous model can handle about 35% more load than the
> multithreaded model. Note that "asynchronous" in this context means
> "select/poll", not POSIX asynchronous IO - which we would expect to be
> more effecient under extremely heavy load (more than 1000 simultaneous
> connections).

I read the article, and got turned off by their incorrect terminology
and by the fact that they ignored things like Solaris's /dev/poll,
Linux's realtime signal-based i/o, and FreeBSD's kqueue call.
I know for a fact that FreeBSD using kqueue can handle several orders of
magnitude more network connections than the authors of that article achieved,
so this isn't a minor quibble.

One has to wonder whether the authors have seen http://www.kegel.com/c10k.html,
it doesn't sound like it.

But hey, it was interesting data anyway.
- Dan