[Mono-dev] FastCGI Performance

Mon Apr 7 21:34:09 UTC 2014

Is that why you mention libuv? Does it not have the same issue as libevent
in that regard?

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Nikita Tsukanov <keks9n at gmail.com> wrote:

> You shouldn't worry much about "plain-HTTP vs. FastCGI", since HTTP/1.1
> has that wonderful connection keep-alive feature well supported by nginx,
> and FastCGI's request multiplexing is very rarely supported by proxying-web
> servers (nginx doesn't have support for that, for example).
>
> The main bottleneck of evhttp is the fact that it's able to utilize only
> one CPU core per listened socket (main event loop is single-threaded). I.
> e. it's impossible to accept connection on one evbase and pass that socket
> to evhttp on another. So the lack of "worker thread" concept for I/O limits
> benchmark value to 90K rps. With some trivial patches for libevent2 it will
> be possible to reach 300-350K rps on the same hardware. But in that case we
> have to ship patched version of libevent with the library itself.
>
> Regards,
> Nikita
>
>
> 2014-04-08 1:04 GMT+04:00 Giuliano Barberi <gbarberi at aotaonline.com>:
>
>> Nikita, thanks for your work on evhttp-sharp. I have looked into the Mono
>> source and saw that too about how Mono just has an IO threadpool to
>> complete the requests. I wonder if the overhead it adds is very large
>> though or if it's still possible to make it efficient enough.
>>
>> The only thing that I don't like about the evhttp-sharp implementation is
>> that we have to proxy the requests from the webserver to evhttp. A libuv
>> solution would be interesting as well and could be implemented as a FastCGI
>> wrapper instead of proxying the requests manually. There are already some
>> wrappers around libuv for C# like https://github.com/txdv/LibuvSharp so
>> it might not be hard to do the rest. Granted the evhttp-sharp performance
>> is already great and this would only be worth it if it improves performance
>> at the end of the day.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Nikita Tsukanov <keks9n at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Author of that libevent-wrapper reporting in. It seems that the
>>> implementation of asynchronous sockets in Mono is limited to the original
>>> Win32 API model with I/O completion ports, (i. e. multiple threads from a
>>> thread pool waiting for some events from sockets, done at Windows kernel
>>> level). On Linux/MacOS Mono has to emulate that by running a separate
>>> thread for epoll/kqueue event loop and then queueing callbacks passed to
>>> BeginRead/Write to a "common" thread pool. This approach will always cause
>>> some thread-communication overhead, so it's almost impossible to create an
>>> efficient socket server implementation using System.Net.Sockets.
>>>
>>> It might be worth to create some single-threaded socket I/O stack using
>>> libuv and async/await model with custom synchronization context (actual
>>> ReadAsync and WriteAsync don't even need to return Task, just something
>>> that has GetAwaiter method).
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Nikita
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-04-07 19:52 GMT+04:00 Giuliano Barberi <gbarberi at aotaonline.com>:
>>>
>>>> I think just running the same test as evhttp-listener in the
>>>> TechemPower Benchmark where it serializes JSON is fine. All we are looking
>>>> for is a comparison. If we submit the test to them on Github then it should
>>>> be available for the next benchmark too. Seems like we could add the
>>>> HyperFastCgi and the FOS implementations. So far the evhttp one is super
>>>> fast but it relies on native code so it has some custom code to pick either
>>>> the Windows DLL or the Linux SO and needs those dependencies installed
>>>> separately. It would be great to have a fast C# implementation.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> On Apr 7, 2014 10:20 AM, "Marcelo Zabani" <mzabani at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have not compared the fastcgi implementation per se, because it is
>>>>> not very easy to test only the underlying fastcgi implementations and I
>>>>> never had the time for that.
>>>>> Fos, however, is a highly asynchronous server implementation, and I've
>>>>> seen it dealing with a lot of connections simultaneously. I haven't
>>>>> benchmarked it properly and compared it to other servers yet, but I'll try
>>>>> to do that in the next two weeks.
>>>>> I run a website with Fos and I get 10-20ms average response time
>>>>> (measured as Fos -> Nginx, that is, not counting the time it takes for the
>>>>> response to reach the user) with static pages. In case you want to take a
>>>>> better look at these numbers, take a look at
>>>>> http://beeder.com.br/_stats
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't be scared by the large response times for some of the URLs, as
>>>>> those are usually contacting Facebook through Fb's API.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Giuliano Barberi <
>>>>> gbarberi at aotaonline.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you benchmarked it to see how it compares to the existing
>>>>>> FastCGI implementation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 11:03 PM, Marcelo Zabani <mzabani at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  In case you want to host an OWIN application with Mono and
>>>>>>> FastCgi, you may wanna take a look at a project of mine, Fos:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/mzabani/Fos
>>>>>>> It is also available at NuGet.
>>>>>>>  ------------------------------
>>>>>>> From: Greg Najda <gregnajda at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: 06/04/2014 22:43
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To: Giuliano Barberi <gbarberi at aotaonline.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Mono Developer List <mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] FastCGI Performance
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Someone looked into Mono FastCGI performance a couple months ago
>>>>>>> and made a series of blog posts:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://forcedtoadmin.blogspot.com/2013/11/servicestack-performance-in-mono-p1.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://forcedtoadmin.blogspot.com/2013/11/servicestack-performance-in-mono-p2.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://forcedtoadmin.blogspot.com/2013/12/servicestack-performance-in-mono-p3.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He ended up writing a replacement for the Mono FastCGI server
>>>>>>> instead of changing it because of architectural changes:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/xplicit/HyperFastCgi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Giuliano Barberi <
>>>>>>> gbarberi at aotaonline.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After looking at some of the Mono web benchmarks (
>>>>>>>> http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r8&hw=i7&test=json&s=2&p=13ydj4-0 )
>>>>>>>> I got very curious as to why FastCGI performance was so much lower than
>>>>>>>> when using a C# libevent implementation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you look at nancy-libevent2 vs nancy benchmarks, the only
>>>>>>>> difference is a C# wrapper around libevent (
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/kekekeks/evhttp-sharp ) vs Mono FastCGI. Since
>>>>>>>> Mono uses epoll underneath which is what libevent uses afaik, I would not
>>>>>>>> expect there to be such a gap in performance.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm curious whether performance of FastCGI is being looked at or if
>>>>>>>> this is expected. Mono when using FastCGI benchmarks almost at the bottom
>>>>>>>> of the list when compared to many other technologies (
>>>>>>>> http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r8&hw=i7&test=json ).
>>>>>>>> I've done a bit of analysis on where the bottleneck is and everything I've
>>>>>>>> found is pointing to the FastCGI implementation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Giuliano Barberi
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>>>>>>>> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
>>>>>>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Giuliano Barberi
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>>>> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
>>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>>> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Giuliano Barberi
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>
>

-- 
Giuliano Barberi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-devel-list/attachments/20140407/8ef47e3e/attachment.html>