On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Niels Bakker <niels=na...@bakker.net> wrote:
> * mi...@stillhq.com (Michael Still) [Fri 01 Nov 2013, 05:27 CET]: > > Its about the CPU cost of the crypto. I was once told the number of CPUs >> required to do SSL on web search (which I have now forgotten) and it was a >> bigger number than you'd expect -- certainly hundreds. >> > > False: > https://www.imperialviolet.**org/2010/06/25/overclocking-**ssl.html<https://www.imperialviolet.org/2010/06/25/overclocking-ssl.html> > > "On our production frontend machines, SSL/TLS accounts for less than 1% of > the CPU load, less than 10KB of memory per connection and less than 2% of > network overhead. Many people believe that SSL takes a lot of CPU time and > we hope the above numbers (public for the first time) will help to dispel > that." That was *front end* SSL/TLS - not internal / back end SSL/TLS. One could assert that the per-activity SSL/TLS overhead might be the same for internal services accessed to answer a front-end request, but that's not necessarily true. The code/request ratios and external/internal SSL/TLS startup costs are going to vary wildly from service to service. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
