vibe.d benchmarks

[Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d]

V Sat, 02 Jan 2016 03:00:19 +0000
Etienne Cimon via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> napsáno:

> On Friday, 1 January 2016 at 11:38:53 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
> > On Thursday, 31 December 2015 at 18:23:17 UTC, Etienne Cimon 
> > wrote:  
> >> On Thursday, 31 December 2015 at 13:29:49 UTC, Daniel Kozak 
> >> wrote:  
> >>> On Thursday, 31 December 2015 at 12:09:30 UTC, Etienne Cimon 
> >>> wrote:  
> >>>> [...]  
> >>>
> >>> When I use HTTPServerOption.distribute with libevent I get 
> >>> better performance but with libasync it drops from 20000 
> >>> req/s to 80 req/s. So maybe some another performance problem  
> >>
> >> I launch libasync programs as multiple processes, a bit like 
> >> postgresql. The TCP listening is done with REUSEADDR, so the 
> >> kernel can distribute it and it scales linearly without any 
> >> fear of contention on the GC. My globals go in redis or 
> >> databases  
> >
> > ?  
> 
> With libasync, you can run multiple instances of your vibe.d 
> server and the linux kernel will round robin the incoming 
> connections.

Yes, but I speak about one instance of vibe.d with multiple
workerThreads witch perform really bad with libasync