Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

perf-measures: re-introduce httpz #132

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

perf-measures: re-introduce httpz #132

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Commits on Sep 20, 2024

  1. perf-measures: re-introduce httpz 

    In the 0.12.0 branch, [httpz](https://github.com/karlseguin/http.zig)
was added to the perf measurements.

Apparently, somehow this got lost, which is a pity. httpz is
super-promising.

Given the perf benchmarks in [this
PR comment](antonputra/tutorials#280 (comment)),
I would have expected httpz to be on par with or better than zap in our
`measure.sh` tests.

However, on my M3 max mac box, I get the following:

**ZAP**:

```
➜  zap git:(reintroduce_httpz_perf) ✗ ./wrk/measure.sh zig-zap
INFO: Listening on port 3000
Listening on 0.0.0.0:3000
INFO: Server is running 4 workers X 4 threads with facil.io 0.7.4 (kqueue)
* Detected capacity: 131056 open file limit
* Root pid: 73099
* Press ^C to stop

INFO: 73110 is running.
INFO: 73111 is running.
INFO: 73112 is running.
INFO: 73113 is running.
========================================================================
                          zig-zap
========================================================================
Running 10s test @ http://127.0.0.1:3000
  4 threads and 400 connections
  Thread Stats   Avg      Stdev     Max   +/- Stdev
    Latency     1.31ms  533.41us  18.77ms   90.57%
    Req/Sec    76.67k     9.04k   86.46k    84.25%
  Latency Distribution
     50%    1.15ms
     75%    1.17ms
     90%    1.75ms
     99%    2.94ms
  3052064 requests in 10.02s, 462.80MB read
  Socket errors: connect 0, read 135, write 0, timeout 0
Requests/sec: 304601.19
Transfer/sec:     46.19MB
```

**httpz**:

```
➜  zap git:(reintroduce_httpz_perf) ✗ ./wrk/measure.sh httpz
========================================================================
                          httpz
========================================================================
Running 10s test @ http://127.0.0.1:3000
  4 threads and 400 connections
  Thread Stats   Avg      Stdev     Max   +/- Stdev
    Latency     2.26ms  528.72us  18.84ms   84.61%
    Req/Sec    44.46k     7.35k   85.50k    88.00%
  Latency Distribution
     50%    2.35ms
     75%    2.39ms
     90%    2.43ms
     99%    3.26ms
  1768925 requests in 10.01s, 91.10MB read
  Socket errors: connect 0, read 230, write 0, timeout 0
Requests/sec: 176712.50
Transfer/sec:      9.10MB
```

Which looks way off. I must admit, I might have done a bad httpz
implementation.

Seeking help from @karlseguin. My motivation: route people away from zap
to alternatives like httpz or even zzz, as those are pure zig, and seem
to be of really good performance. I want a world in which we don't have
to resort to C frameworks to do good, zig-worthy servers 😄 to come
true.
    @renerocksai
    renerocksai committed Sep 20, 2024
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    49f5cd9 View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history