4
回答
Cherokee很强、很努力!
终于搞明白,存储TCO原来是这样算的>>>   

昨天,我刚在blog里发文置疑Cherokee的性能,并认为相比Apache而言Cherokee稳定性过低、LCMP组合效率低于LAMP。今早一起床就收到了Cherokee更新的消息,我重新对Cherokee进行了一番基准测试进行评估。

Cherokee测试结果:

ruyi7952@D610:/$ ab -n 1000 -c 100 http://localhost:8080/phpinfo.php

引用
This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $>              
Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/
Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/      

Benchmarking localhost (be patient)
Completed 100 requests            
Completed 200 requests            
Completed 300 requests            
Completed 400 requests            
Completed 500 requests            
Completed 600 requests            
Completed 700 requests            
Completed 800 requests            
Completed 900 requests            
Completed 1000 requests            
Finished 1000 requests            


Server Software:        Cherokee/0.11.6
Server Hostname:        localhost      
Server Port:            8080          

Document Path:          /phpinfo.php
Document Length:        81304 bytes

Concurrency Level:      100
Time taken for tests:   7.362 seconds
Complete requests:      1000        
Failed requests:        156          
   (Connect: 0, Receive: 0, Length: 156, Exceptions: 0)
Write errors:           0                              
Total transferred:      81481656 bytes                
HTML transferred:       81303656 bytes                
Requests per second:    135.83 [#/sec] (mean)          
Time per request:       736.240 [ms] (mean)            
Time per request:       7.362 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          10807.87 [Kbytes/sec] received

Connection Times (ms)
              min  mean[+/-sd] median   max
Connect:        0    2   6.0      0      21
Processing:    20  701 139.2    717     908
Waiting:       12  695 139.2    711     905
Total:         24  703 134.7    718     908

Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
  50%    718
  66%    725
  75%    731
  80%    739
  90%    807
  95%    894
  98%    897
  99%    907
100%    908 (longest request)



结果概要:请求1000次,失败156次,平均每秒处理135.83次请求。

我的不完整结论:通过测试我发现一个问题,一旦调整Cherokee中有关php解析器的参数,第一次请求PHP页面失败率相当高,最狂的是测试1000次请求,居然失败996次fear。之后,再请求页面一直平衡在1000次请求失败156次,失败率在15.6%,有效请求次数为114.64052次。而我同时安装的apache则一直保持失败39次的水平。在可用性方面Cherokee 0.11.6较之0.11.5有很大幅度提高,但稳定性比之Apache还是有所欠缺。当我再次使用PHP脚本myBench 1.2.1进行LCMP性能测试,得出的结果为平均10000次写入/秒。从这个测试结果看0.11.6要全面优于上一个版本0.11.5,更是全面超越LAMP组合最多9800次写入/秒。

UPDATE: 这个Cherokee还真不能用常理度之,它的稳定性不得不让我很是怀疑。今天早上更新0.11.6后,当时测试出LCMP性能达到了每秒万次写入的水 平,中午我睡了一个午觉之后再开机再测试LCMP组合最高峰值只能到每秒9800次写入,最低仅有每秒3000次写入。好郁闷的东东啊!

举报
红薯
发帖于9年前 4回/1K+阅
顶部