On 3/21/19 9:02 PM, Daniel Stenberg wrote: >> If my understanding is correct, it seems to me that I could underfeed >> libcurl with my "second implementation". Ie, if I give curl only 8 >> handles at a time, while the server would be OK to have 16 downloads >> multiplexed, then I'm doing poorly... > > Well, perhaps, You then assume that you need many streams to be > effective, while a server typically can saturate a pipe fine with a > single stream if it just has the data. There's nothing that says you > get a higher total bandwidth with 16 streams than with 8 or 4. > > Of course you might have some insights into the server end of things > for this use case and can make an educated guess, but then maybe you > can then also make an educated guess on how many parallel transfers to > keep?
Well, I think I don't really understand how this multiplex thing works. I though the more parallelism the better, since in my case I have a LOT of small files to download. But maybe it's not that simple. At least that's what you answer hints :) Anyway, if I want to understand about performances, there's nothing better than running some tests and measuring. Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer, and long live to libcurl, Arnaud ------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe: https://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library Etiquette: https://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
