[Spread-users] large # of small messages transmission using spread
yairamir at cnds.jhu.edu
Wed Dec 4 01:47:32 EST 2002
By having only one spread daemon in the system you nullified all the protocol work in
Spread. I am not surprised that your performance is not good.
Put a Spread daemon only on all of the machines that have a client.
Use IP Multicast address in the config file with one segment only
(assuming you are talking about a local area network).
1400 messages per second on such a network should not be a problem.
You might want to read the user guide.
¿øÅÂÈ¯> We are using spread to send large # of small messages under 512B.
¿øÅÂÈ¯> Total # of messages per hour would be more than 5,000,000 msgs.
¿øÅÂÈ¯> spread configuration is:
¿øÅÂÈ¯> one spread server: sun nettra t120(2x450Mhz) with 1Gbps ethernet
¿øÅÂÈ¯> two spread clients: sun machine (1 x 450Mhz) with 1Gbps ethernet
¿øÅÂÈ¯> transmission mode: reliable delivery mode using TCP as a transport
¿øÅÂÈ¯> In our experiment, we found that the spread daemon on the server machine
¿øÅÂÈ¯> eated upto 80% of CPU resource. :-(
¿øÅÂÈ¯> So, I looked at the spread daemon source and found that the main loop is select.
¿øÅÂÈ¯> I tried to make a small change spread daemon to work in multi-thread mode.
¿øÅÂÈ¯> But its performance went down...
¿øÅÂÈ¯> My idea for such a application is
¿øÅÂÈ¯> (1) multiple spread daemons on the same server machine
¿øÅÂÈ¯> for traffic partitioning (for shorter delay)
¿øÅÂÈ¯> (2) any idea from some smart guy :-)
¿øÅÂÈ¯> Any help/comments would be **highly** appreciated!
¿øÅÂÈ¯> Thanks in adv.
¿øÅÂÈ¯> Spread-users mailing list
¿øÅÂÈ¯> Spread-users at lists.spread.org
More information about the Spread-users