On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 23:25:16 GMT, David Nadlinger wrote:
What I used was "weighttp" on two separate linux machines connected by GbE. The client machine had to have a powerful CPU or "weighttp" wasn't able to saturate the "bench-http-server". Currently it's a little unclear how well the performance actually is, as it hasn't been benchmarked for a while and there were some changes in critical parts that may have had an influence. There is also a recent thread about this.
Hm, I don't think I'll be able to set up two locally connected, beefy enough machines until the holidays are over. Just using the benchmark server/client examples, it seems that the CPU overhead is a little lower than with the DMD-compiled executables, but that's obviously not a very good way of measuring things.
This is probably most difficult part when trying to do trustworthy benchmark in this domain. Modern server solutions are so often so capable that for a typical consumer computer it is easier to hit the bottleneck of network card h/w / network driver / I/O routines than CPU limit. Of course one can always add expensive computations into request handlers but that won't be pure benchmark of network server anymore then.