|
|
|
|
|
by trishume
1252 days ago
|
|
I agree most HTTP server benchmarks are highly misleading in that way, and mention in my post how disappointed I am at the lack of good benchmarks. I also agree that typical HTTP servers would fall over at much lower new connection loads. I'm talking about a hypothetical HTTPS server that used optimized kernel-bypass networking. Here's a kernel-bypass HTTP server benchmarked doing 50k new connections per core second while re-using nginx code: https://github.com/F-Stack/f-stack. But I don't know of anyone who's done something similar with HTTPS support. |
|
One thing which we noticed was that there was a considerable difference in performance characteristics based on how we parallelized the load testing tool (multiple threads, multiple processes, multiple kubernetes pods, pods forced to be distributed across nodes).
I think that when you run non-distrubuted load tests you benefit from bunch of cool things which happen with http2 and Linux (multiplexing, resource sharing etc) which might make applications seem much faster than they would be in the real world.