Re: [dispatch] SIP-CLF: Results on ASCII vs. binary representation
Theo Zourzouvillys <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sipping |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Vijay K. Gurbani <[email protected]> wrote: > If you find any errors in the programs used to generate > these results, please do let us know. actually, your test program is *grossly* skewed in favour of the ASCII implementation. If you modify it slightly to behave in a way i'd expect any developer to, you get (avg 5 runs on a crappy dell vostro desktop): Binary CLF: 0m6.947s ASCII CLF: 0m7.004s If you take i/o out of the question too and set output to /dev/null, then you get: Binary CLF: 0m0.610s ASCII CLF: 0m1.905s which is far more realistic for high throughput servers which are logging to an in-memory circular buffer or some shared memory segments. modified source: http://dev.voip.co.uk/~theo/write-clf.theo.txt diff: http://dev.voip.co.uk/~theo/write-clf.diff note that i wrote it in all of about 120 seconds, so there may be some errors in the output format, but my point stands :-) ~ Theo http://twitter.com/zourzouvillys http://crazygreek.co.uk/ _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use [email protected] for questions on current sip Use [email protected] for new developments of core SIP