Re: Latest Stack Performance
"M. Ranganathan" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.voip.nist-sip |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Yes. 6/19 seems to be around the last time I ran the performance test and got the results I reported. Please check out the stack from that date. You can perhaps help identify the problem Ranga Marden P. Marshall wrote: > I performed my benchmarks using the version of the stack that was > checked into dev.java.net over the July 4th weekend. Are you > suggesting that I try an earlier version from the NIST repository? > > -Mardy > > On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 14:01:57 -0400 > "M. Rangnathan" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hmmm.. Something is amiss indeed. Looks like something bad happened >> over the last week or two. Check out the version from about a week >> ago and you should see the reported numbers. I'll take a look and see >> what the mater could be. >> >> Ranga >> >> Marden P. Marshall wrote: >> >>> First, great job on the stack! >>> >>> I've been doing some basic performance benchmarking of the latest >>> stack code. Before I talk about the actual performance numbers, let >>> me first describe the test setup. I used a variation of the UAS >>> code: "test/load/concurrency/Shootme.java". The only functional >>> changes that I made was to remove the delay in responding to the >>> INVITE and to disable the generation of the BYE. The UAC is >>> responsible for generating both the INVITE and the BYE. I then use >>> a SIP load generator application called sipp >>> (http://sipp.sourceforge.net) to generate a load directed to the >>> UAS. The call scenario that I used is as follows: >>> >>> INVITE ----------> >>> 100 <---------- >>> 180 <---------- >>> 200 <---------- >>> ACK ----------> >>> BYE ----------> >>> 200 <---------- >>> >>> I then ran the UAS code on a Pentium-M PC running at 2.5GHz using >>> version 1.5.0_06 JVM. I ran the UAC traffic generator on another >>> machine so as not to interfere with the UAS performance. So now for >>> the results. >>> >>> First, I am seeing about a 25% performance improvement between the >>> old stack and the current version. But I am not seeing the >>> performance numbers that others have reported. With the new code >>> and this hardware configuration, I am only able to get about 24 >>> CPS. I believe that someone reported getting about 70 CAPS on a >>> similar hardware platform. I am not sure if the call scenarios are >>> the same, as that can make a huge difference. >>> >>> I would be curious to know what other peoples experience has been in >>> benchmarking the code and wether or not my results are in-line. >>> >>> -Mardy >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nist-sip mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://www-x.antd.nist.gov/mailman/listinfo/nist-sip >>> >> >> >> -- >> M. Ranganathan Advanced Networking Technologies Division, >> National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), >> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8920, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. tel:301 975 3664 >> , fax:301 590 0932 http://w3.antd.nist.gov/ >> Advanced Networking Technologies For the People! > > > _______________________________________________ > nist-sip mailing list > [email protected] > http://www-x.antd.nist.gov/mailman/listinfo/nist-sip > -- M. Ranganathan Advanced Networking Technologies Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8920, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. tel:301 975 3664 , fax:301 590 0932 http://w3.antd.nist.gov/ Advanced Networking Technologies For the People!