W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: SPDY and the HTTP Binding

From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 00:53:19 +0200
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20121012225319.GH14734@1wt.eu>
Hi Roberto,

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 02:49:20PM -0700, Roberto Peon wrote:
> The most recent output, copy/pasted is:
> 
> "Delta-coding took: 0.642199 seconds for: 104300 header frames or
> 6.15723e-06 per header or 162411 headers/sec or 8.88429e+07 bytes/sec"
> 
> So, ~89 million bytes/second and 162k requests/second for the delta-coding
> on one core.

It does not seem bad, and I also know that it's hard to compare numbers.
I like to count in terms of bytes per second or headers per second, but
obviously it depends on the coding scheme.

Right now I made a test on haproxy using a request to pinterest.com that
I captured from Firefox 13 (didn't know the site so I tried it). The
request looks like this, it's 282 bytes long and has 7 header fields :

  GET / HTTP/1.1
  Host: pinterest.com
  User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:13.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/13.0.1
  Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8
  Accept-Language: en-us,en;q=0.5
  Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
  Connection: keep-alive

It was running on a single core of a core i7 2600 @3.4 GHz. I sent it 4
million times to haproxy which sent a redirect on them, and it took 3.609
seconds for the 4 million reqs, which is 1.1 million req/s, which is also
exactly the same number as it reports in the stats, and 312 MB/s. So at
first glance it's 3.5-7 times faster on a single core than the compressor
alone. So this would mean that it would spend 88% of its CPU time in the
compressor alone, and the 12% remaining doing its job.

I understand the code is not optimized yet, but this typically is the type
of thing I want us to be extremely careful about, because it's very easy
to completely kill performance for the last percent of optimization over
the wire. In fact I'm not that much worried for the 1.1-to-2.0 conversion
because as time goes, the need for this work will fade away and won't
represent most of the CPU usage. But routing and processing 2.0 to 2.0
should be optimally fast.

> Given that most machines have more than once core, this
> performance seems pretty reasonable to me, especially given that it is not
> really been optimized. I'd hope that bandwidth was predominantly
> entity-bodies and not headers, and so the bandwidth doesn't seem
> problematic to me either.

Unfortunately my experience has often been that most of the requests
are if-modified-since and most of the responses are 304 on a number of
web sites, so we still need to be careful.

Thanks for sharing your data BTW !

Willy
Received on Friday, 12 October 2012 22:53:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 12 October 2012 22:53:53 GMT