[Spread-users] Performance Question
Mike Perik
michaelperik at yahoo.com
Wed Dec 15 17:31:30 EST 2004
I've done another measurement. For ten minutes I
publish data on 33 groups. The server publishing the
data timestamps when it sends the message and when the
client receives the data it timestamps. I diff the
two timestamps for each message and I'm now seeing an
average of >.6 sec delivery time. This is still very
high.
xray_st = spread ticker running on machine xray
xray_tt = tcp ticker running on machine xray
frln09_st = client using spread
frln09_tt = client using tcp (connects to xray_tt)
Times are in seconds and its the average difference
between the column and row (ie. time_diff = column -
row).
frln09_st xray_st frln09_tt xray_tt
frln09_st 0.000000 -0.635060 -0.633197 -0.634968
xray_st 0.635060 0.000000 0.001863 0.000092
frln09_tt 0.633197 -0.001863 0.000000 -0.001771
xray_tt 0.634968 -0.000092 0.001771 0.000000
Message rates are:
Max: 968/s
Avg: 133/s
All messages are under 64 bytes.
I was looking through the mailing list archive and
found a discussion back on 07/27/2004 about adjusting
the Hurry_timeout to 40 msec which resulted in the
latency to drop dramaticly. I'm going to try this
next. Are there any problems with doing this?
Some of the documentation on the website states that
financial institutions are using Spread. What are
they using it for? With this kind of latency there
is no way they can be using if for publishing market
data.
I'd like to see Spread work...
Thanks,
Mike
--- Mike Perik <michaelperik at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes, they are separated by a switch. I've since
> removed frln06 from the segment to eliminate it as a
> possible problem. I'm still seeing .7 sec
> difference
> in times. I was not expecting this at all and am a
> little disappointed. I understand that you gain some
> things with Spread but .7 sec seems high for just
> multicasting on a local network.
>
> The message size is small, <64 bytes.
>
> Are there any optimizations I could do for this type
> of scenario? It's basicly a single, high volume
> broadcaster and many clients.
>
> Would having multiple broadcasters splitting up the
> load allow quicker delivery?
>
> How would multiple segments help this? How would
> that
> look in the config file?
>
> I've heard that OpenAIS may handle this situation a
> little better. Any opinion about that?
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> --- Ryan Caudy <rcaudy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is frln06 separated from the others by a router or
> > switch? My reason
> > for guessing this is the different IP address
> range
> > it belongs to. If
> > so, this may be your problem -- Spread sends
> > mutlicast messages with a
> > TTL of 1. You may need to use two Spread_Segments
> > to avoid this
> > problem. Are the other daemons even finding
> frln06?
> >
> > On a non-lossy network, I would expect to see
> > slightly higher latency
> > for messages when comparing Spread and TCP/IP.
> Note
> > that, on the
> > ring, RELIABLE messages are treated the same as
> FIFO
> > messages.
> >
> > Let me know if this helps.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ryan
> >
> > On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:45:59 -0800 (PST), Mike
> Perik
> > <michaelperik at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I've been working on evaluating the performance
> of
> > > Spread for distributing a Market Data Feed. I'm
> > > subscribing to about 33 high volume stocks and
> > > broadcasting the information over a 9 node
> spread
> > > network. One publisher and 9 clients receiving
> > the
> > > data.
> > >
> > > I'm comparing the times the information is
> > received on
> > > the spread system to times taken for a 9 tcp/ip
> > > client/server setup.
> > >
> > > I'm running both systems on the same machines at
> > the
> > > same time so I can take the log files and strip
> > out
> > > the common period of time they ran to do the
> > > comparison of timestamps.
> > >
> > > I'm sending the Spread messages as RELIABLE.
> > >
> > > I'm seeing on average that the Spread messages
> are
> > > about .7 secs behind the tcp/ip clients.
> > >
> > > Has anyone else done similiar tests?
> > >
> > > Does this sound right?
> > >
> > > I'm a littled surprised by results.
> > >
> > > I am seeing a consistant difference in the times
> > > between the first tcp/ip client and the last
> > tcp/ip
> > > client which you would expect.
> > >
> > > Could the machine frln06 be causing a problem?
> > >
> > > The client on that machine does not receive any
> > data.
> > > I've got my network guy looking into why that is
> > > happening. I believe the router is not
> configured
> > > properly.
> > >
> > > Spread_Segment 225.0.1.1:5003 {
> > > frln09 10.0.103.183
> > > frln11 10.0.103.185
> > > frln22 10.0.103.100
> > > frln03 10.0.103.173
> > > frln16 10.0.103.124
> > > frln18 10.0.103.130
> > > wango 10.0.103.102
> > > frln06 10.0.1.175
> > > gamma 10.0.103.101
> > > nero 10.0.103.141
> > > }
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Send a seasonal email greeting and help others.
> Do
> > good.
> > > http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Spread-users mailing list
> > > Spread-users at lists.spread.org
> > >
> >
>
http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Spread-users mailing list
> > Spread-users at lists.spread.org
> >
>
http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced
> search.
> http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spread-users mailing list
> Spread-users at lists.spread.org
>
http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.
http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
More information about the Spread-users
mailing list