Speed problem downloading large file

[user3]

Hello,

I have tested the speed of the web server using ab.
Really, litespeed is faster than apache as my ab test.
But the result was not good against large file download.

At this site(http://www.litespeedtech.com/benchmark.html),
Just tested small size file.

Anyone who have tested larger file(over 1M) download speed test?
The result was like below.

Apache 2.2 is 2~3 times faster than litespeed.

-> there is no limit(bandwidth, conneciton..) at configuration file.
and I have tested at a server which have different port number.
from local and remote, but the result was same.

apache 2.2 : 80
litespeed : 8080

# ab -c 10 http://test.server:80/largee_file

Server Software: Apache/2.2.0
Server Hostname: test.server
Server Port: 80

Document Path: large_file
Document Length: 300260 bytes

Concurrency Level: 10
Time taken for tests: 0.052 seconds
Complete requests: 1
Failed requests: 0
Broken pipe errors: 0
Total transferred: 3005110 bytes
HTML transferred: 3002600 bytes
Requests per second: 19.23 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 520.00 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 52.00 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 57790.58 [Kbytes/sec] received


# ab -c 10 http://test.server:8080/largee_file
Server Software: LiteSpeed
Server Hostname: test.server
Server Port: 8080

Document Path: large_file
Document Length: 300260 bytes

Concurrency Level: 10
Time taken for tests: 0.095 seconds
Complete requests: 1
Failed requests: 0
Broken pipe errors: 0
Total transferred: 3005160 bytes
HTML transferred: 3002600 bytes
Requests per second: 10.53 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 950.00 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 95.00 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 31633.26 [Kbytes/sec] received



Thanks in advance.

[mistwang]

It does not sound right, for file that large, it should be network bandwidth bounded no matter which server is used, even with 1Gb link in our lab.
What is your test environment? What is the CPU utilization when you are testing both servers? Is there any disk I/O intensive application running the server when you were testing?

What is the concurrent level of the the test? For standard edition, it should not go beyond 300 for large file test.

[user3]

Thanks for your reply.

But it was tested at s same server which have different port number.
and I have tested over 100 times from local and remote, but the result was same.

The tested file is 300k, and 25M.

apache 2.2 : 80
litespeed(the lastest version) : 8080

# ab -c 10 http://test.server:80/largee_file

Server Software: Apache/2.2.0
Server Hostname: test.server
Server Port: 80

Document Path: large_file
Document Length: 300260 bytes

Concurrency Level: 10
Time taken for tests: 0.052 seconds
Complete requests: 1
Failed requests: 0
Broken pipe errors: 0
Total transferred: 3005110 bytes
HTML transferred: 3002600 bytes
Requests per second: 19.23 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 520.00 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 52.00 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 57790.58 [Kbytes/sec] received


# ab -c 10 http://test.server:8080/largee_file
Server Software: LiteSpeed
Server Hostname: test.server
Server Port: 8080

Document Path: large_file
Document Length: 300260 bytes

Concurrency Level: 10
Time taken for tests: 0.095 seconds
Complete requests: 1
Failed requests: 0
Broken pipe errors: 0
Total transferred: 3005160 bytes
HTML transferred: 3002600 bytes
Requests per second: 10.53 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 950.00 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 95.00 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 31633.26 [Kbytes/sec] received



Thanks in advance.

[ts77]

concurrency seems to be 10 looking at above results.

but just one request looks unfair to me.
try it with at least 1000 requests or something to get some good averages.

also 30mb/s vs. 56mb/s ... whats the speed of the harddisk?

@mistwang, don't know if apache gains something in io-performance for reading from disk with its many threads.

[user3]

Thanks for your reply.

When I set -c 100 or 1000, the result was same.
Apache seems faster over 4 times. (at a same server)


### Apache 2.2.0
Server Software: Apache/2.2.0
Server Hostname: test.server
Server Port: 80

Document Path: large_file
Document Length: 300260 bytes

Concurrency Level: 1000
Time taken for tests: 0.408 seconds
Complete requests: 1
Failed requests: 0
Broken pipe errors: 0
Total transferred: 12020440 bytes
HTML transferred: 12010400 bytes
Requests per second: 2.45 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 408000.00 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 408.00 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 29461.86 [Kbytes/sec] received

### litespeed
Server Software: LiteSpeed
Server Hostname: test.server
Server Port: 8080

Document Path: large_file
Document Length: 300260 bytes

Concurrency Level: 1000
Time taken for tests: 1.184 seconds
Complete requests: 1
Failed requests: 0
Broken pipe errors: 0
Total transferred: 6766912 bytes
HTML transferred: 6746176 bytes
Requests per second: 0.84 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 1184000.00 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 1184.00 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 5715.30 [Kbytes/sec] received

Anyone who have tested against large file?
If then, Please post a ab result.

So thanks again..

and my test environment is below..

linux CentOS 3.5
kernel is 2.4.21-32.0.1.EL
CPU is P3 750Mhz
RAM is 512M
Disk is Ultra160 SCSI

[Xorlev]

Important question, are you using LSWS Standard, Professional, or Enterprise? Standard is capped to 160kb/s concurrent bandwidth I believe.

[xing]

user3, I'm going to do a mirror setup to see exactly what is going on here with the test results.

If you can, please email your apache config file, lsws's /conf/httpd_config.xml and the vhost directory/conf/vhconf.xml to xing@litespeedtech.com.

I can test with my own setup but it would be best with a perfect mirror.

Xorlev, there is no bandwidth cap for the standard version of any version for that fact. The 160KB/s limit is the download cap set by us when you download binary packages from litespeedtech.com so people don't crash our bandwidth . =) We need to remove or reword that line so more people don't get confused.

[user3]

thanks for your reply.

I'm afraid, I have tested standard version.
and 160kb/s limit makes so slow,I think.

By the way,
160kb/s means limitted per file or all files?


Thanks in advance.

[xing]

There is no speed "cap"/limit in Standard or any of the LiteSpeed versions. Want to make sure others reading this post are not mistaken. Xorlev is referring to the "download" cap we have set to limit how fast people can download litespeed releases from our website.

[mistwang]

User3,

You are using a wrong "ab" parameter for the test, "-c" is for concurrrency, not for number of requests, "-n" is for that purpose.
Noticed that "Complete requests" is "1" in all of your tests. :P

You should use "ab -n <#req> -c <#concurrency> ...".

Another tip for testing on the same machine is to switch event dispatcher from poll to epoll.

Anyway, what really counts is the result of over the network test. "ab" takes a lot of resource when doing the test locally.