Messages in this thread | | | From | Gerd Knorr <> | Date | Fri, 24 Dec 1999 00:17:04 +0100 | Subject | Re: Bloat? (khttpd) |
| |
> Webservers usually serve a lot of small files (.html and .gif/.png). For > benchmarks and other file-server like situations, latency counts above all. > > kHTTPd achieves this by _not_ doing the syscalls in #1, by not doing all > the rare complex stuff (it "bounces" those requests to userspace), and by > reducing the number of context-switches in the fast path.
# of syscalls is'nt the only thing which reduces latency and improves performance here. Persistent connections also help (no tcp handshake, tcp slowstart, ...). khttpd does'nt support this.
> Benchmarks. GNOME and KDE will provide transparent network-access through > HTTP, for example. This will change HTTP in the direction of a file-server > protocol, where latency counts.
For file-server stuff you'll probably want to use HTTP/1.1 features like byteranges.
Gerd
-- sigfault
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |