Commanche performance

J J azreal1977 at hotmail.com
Thu Feb 8 19:01:42 UTC 2007


>From: Göran Krampe <goran at krampe.se>
>Reply-To: goran at krampe.se, The general-purpose Squeak developers 
>list<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers 
>list"<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>Subject: Re: Commanche performance
>Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 09:18:45 +0100 (CET)
>
>Hi!
>
>I did some benchmarking about 2 years ago but never got around to
>publishing in a readable form (perhaps I posted about it) but from my
>memory I recall:
>
>1. I found some code here and there that I rewrote for speed. Never got
>around releasing those changes. It was not fantastic improvements but
>definitely worthy.

Do you have it laying around?  Maybe it would still be applicable.

>2. After the tweaks the bottleneck appeared to be header parsing. I bet
>that code can also be improved.
>
>3. Dan Shafer has been doing investigations on the lower levels, and if I
>am not mistaken the Croqueteers have very recently discussed Socket issues
>in the Unix VM (stumbled upon that) causing problems. I haven't myself
>looked at this level and IIRC I used "keep alive" when testing which
>probably hides a bit of the Socket issues.
>
>4. Performance varies substantially with size of payload. The larger the
>payload is the header parsing turns into a smaller issue.
>
>5. Oh yeah, I only tested KomHttpServer itself with "in memory" payloads.
>I never bothered with actual file serving which is a can of worms in
>itself.
>
>Since most of us have so much "other stuff" to spend our time on I haven't
>had the time to revisit KomHttpServer tuning.

I hear that.

>I have also felt that some parts of KomHttpServer is needlessly complex
>(especially the whole module setup etc) - but I don't think it affects
>performance in a negative way.

What is wrong with the module stuff?  It looks pretty flexible to me.  It 
might be a little bit of work when talking to the objects via doit's, but a 
nice web/morph interface could be made for it.  At that point, it could have 
all the flexability of apache (maybe more) but in a much *much* friendlier 
way.  I have been setting up apache instances the last couple of weeks at 
work and those config files are a real bear.

_________________________________________________________________
>From predictions to trailers, check out the MSN Entertainment Guide to the 
Academy Awards® 
http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline1




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list