Re: [reSIProcate] reSIProcate speed is much slower now

[Robert Sparks <rjsparks@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

One bit of a sanity check -

The discussion mentions testSpeed - we replaced that with testStack  
quite awhile back.
testSpeed is not in the repository anymore. Was that a typo remember  
things past?

RjS

On Jul 25, 2005, at 6:09 PM, Fischl jason wrote:

> Thanks Scott for fixing this.
>
> I am curious why we see much lower performance on win32 than on Linux.
> On a 3GHz P4, I see > 2k calls per second under linux.
>
> Hmmm.
>
> Jason
>
>
> On 7/25/05, Andy Agarwal <Andy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Great. The problem seems to have been fixed. Now the testSpeed program
> > is generating 395 calls per second (even more than the results  
> > obtained
> > from reSIP 0.9).
> >
> > Thanks for taking care of this...
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Scott Godin [mailto:slgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 11:17 AM
> > To: Andy Agarwal; jason@xxxxxx
> > Cc: resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] reSIProcate speed is much slower now
> >
> > I did some investigation into this issue and found that a relatively
> > recent addition to the WinCompat code is causing the slowness.  If you
> > build with USE_IPV6, then WinCompat uses the
> > determineSourceInterfaceWithIPV6 function, as opposed to the
> > determineSourceInterfaceWithoutIPV6 function.  The
> > WithIPV6 version can end up taking 100-200ms to return - thus slowing
> > down the entire test.
> >
> > This function needs to be fixed - but in the meantime, I've modified  
> > the
> > code so that even if the USE_IPV6 flag is turned on, if the IP Address
> > is a
> > V4 address then it will use the "WithoutIPV6" version instead.  This
> > means that the performance is restored for IPV4 addresses, and only  
> > IPV6
> > addresses will be slow.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andy Agarwal [mailto:Andy@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 12:08 PM
> > To: jason@xxxxxx
> > Cc: resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] reSIProcate speed is much slower now
> >
> >
> > I set the logging to "Error". Nothing was printed by the program while
> > the test ran.
> >
> >         Log::initialize(Log::Cout, Log::Err, argv[0]);
> >
> > I also built the stack and test program in Win32-Release mode. Did not
> > change the reSIP settings. I see that it is set to - Full Optimization
> > (Ox) and Favor Fast Code (/Oy)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fischl jason [mailto:jason.fischl@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 8:57 AM
> > To: Andy Agarwal
> > Cc: jiangjinke@xxxxxxx; resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [reSIProcate] reSIProcate speed is much slower now
> >
> > Did you build with optimization turned on? Also, is any logging  
> > enabled?
> > What type of logging (i.e. file-based)?
> >
> > Jason
> >
> >
> > On 7/21/05, Andy Agarwal <Andy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Yes, I am running the stack on Win32. Should have mentioned that,
> > sorry.
> > > The machine I'm running it on is a 3GHz P4 with 1GB RAM running
> > > Windows
> > > 2003 server
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > > jiangjinke@xxxxxxx
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 10:07 PM
> > > To: resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: [reSIProcate] reSIProcate speed is much slower now
> > >
> > > Hi Andy,
> > >
> > > I'm using the rev. 5129 now, and the average (about 10 times) call
> > > rate is 340 cps.
> > > The platform I'm using:
> > > Redhat EL3,
> > > P4 CPU 2.40GHz,
> > > 1G Memory
> > >
> > > I've try the program on another win32 machine:
> > > 500 calls peformed in 13859 ms, a rate of 36.0776 calls per second.]
> > > CPU: P4 2.4G
> > > MEM: 512M
> > > The performance drops a lot under win32 It seems the problem only
> > > exists in the win32 related code.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Jinke Jiang
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Andy Agarwal" <Andy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: <resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 8:23 AM
> > > Subject: [reSIProcate] reSIProcate speed is much slower now
> > >
> > >
> > > I was using reSIP 0.9.5019 until yesterday. I switched to revision
> > > 5096 from the main branch because of a bug in 0.9 where the duplicate
> > > transaction ids were being created in my multi-threaded app (see -
> > > http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/resiprocate-devel/msg02835.html).
> > >
> > > I was trying to see if there is a performance difference between 0.9
> > > and rev. 5096 from the main branch and found a significant change.
> > > In 0.9 the testSpeed program generates 359 calls per second.
> > > In rev. 5096 it generates 72 calls per second.
> > >
> > > Can anyone explain the reason behind this huge drop ? I have attached
> > > the testSpeed program for those interested.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > andy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> > > -
> > > --
> > > --------
> > >
> > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > resiprocate-devel mailing list
> > > > resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > resiprocate-devel mailing list
> > > resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > resiprocate-devel mailing list
> > > resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel