Re: [reSIProcate] Followup on c-ares support
Brad Spencer wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 05:33:08PM -0600, Adam Roach wrote:
During our testing, we did note that c-ares is substantially faster than
the resip version of ares.
Interesting. How much faster are we talking about?
I don't have the actual benchmarks at hand, but Byron and I discussed
first-cut performance results. Doing some very DNS-heavy processing
(i.e., each request was associated with a different DNS record, so no
caching was possible), I think he said that we were able to push almost
twice as many SIP transactions through repro with c-ares than with the
built-in ares.
Normal disclaimers apply (we may have overlooked something, YMMV, etc).
/a