Re: [reSIProcate] Awful performance on Leopard
So.... for <10k transactions, we would run *faster* with the firewall
turned on some non-trivial fraction of the time? This is getting more
bizarre...
/a
On 07/11/2008 11:43 PM, Alan Hawrylyshen wrote:
Byron,
If you want here is a graph showing the performance.
I generated this by running testStack --num-runs=X --bind=127.0.0.1 in
a loop where X was uniformly distributed between 100 and 100000 for
many hours.
The results from each run are summarized in a single dot. (X on the
x-axis and the reported transaction rate on the y axis).
Red - Application Firewall enabled
Green - Application Firewall disabled as per control panel and
instructions posted in this thread.
Let me know if you want data too.
Thanks
Alan
On Jul 11, 2008, at 11:54 , Eric McMurry wrote:
To bring the application firewall back up:
----
sudo defaults write /Library/Preferences/com.apple.alf firewallunload
-int 0
sudo launchctl unload
/System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.alf.agent.plist
sudo launchctl load
/System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.alf.agent.plist
----
Eric
On Jul 11, 2008, at 13:29 , Byron Campen wrote:
Also, I just figured out how to kill the socketfilterfw deamon
(without it spontaneously reviving itself), and performance is back
to normal:
[bcampen@dn3-233:~/checkouts/resiprocatehead/resip/stack/test]$
./testStack --num-runs=100000 --bind=127.0.0.1
Performing 100000 runs.
100000 registrations peformed in 35384 ms, a rate of 2826.14
transactions per second.]
Note: this test runs both sides (client and server)
I did verify that traffic was flowing too. If you wish to try it
yourself (and keep in mind, this completely disables your firewall),
you probably need to do the following:
sudo defaults write /Library/Preferences/com.apple.alf
firewallunload -int 1
sudo killall socketfilterfw
To put things back the way they were, you probably need to do
the following:
sudo defaults write /Library/Preferences/com.apple.alf
firewallunload -int 0
and reboot (not exactly sure how else to get the daemon to start
back up).
Best regards,
Byron Campen
How did you determine that the firewall was at fault? What
profiling tool did you use? I'd like to see the results too.
Thanks
A
On Jul 11, 2008, at 10:47 , Byron Campen wrote:
Basically the same results:
[bcampen@dn3-233:~/checkouts/resiprocatehead/resip/stack/test]$
./testStack --num-runs=100000 --bind=127.0.0.1
Performing 100000 runs.
100000 registrations peformed in 208295 ms, a rate of 480.088
transactions per second.]
Note: this test runs both sides (client and server)
_______________________________________________
resiprocate-devel mailing list
resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
resiprocate-devel mailing list
resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel