On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 09:57:32 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Can I please get a review for this test-only change which proposes to 
>> improve the test run duration of `java/net/vthread/HttpALot.java` test, on 
>> Linux? This relates to https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294610
>> 
>> Experiments have shown that on Linux, due to delayed TCP ACKs from the 
>> client (for some previous sent data/packet), the server sent response waits 
>> for the ACKs before sending the response data (in a TCP packet). Each 
>> delayed ACK is 40 milli seconds and given the number of requests this test 
>> (intentionally) issues, the delay accumulates causing the test to take 
>> longer duration.
>> 
>> With the change in this PR, the test completes in around 6 to 8 seconds on a 
>> Linux system as compared to 60 odd seconds previously on the same setup. 
>> This change hasn't shown any negative impact on macos (which continues to 
>> run this test in around 5 to 6 seconds like previously). I will trigger some 
>> runs in our CI setup to make sure this works as expected in all other OS too.
>> 
>> As noted in the linked JBS issue, additional experiments to see if anything 
>> can be improved in the JDK network layer will be carried out separately, 
>> outside  the context of this test.
>
> Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   update test comment to address review comments

Marked as reviewed by alanb (Reviewer).

test/jdk/java/net/vthread/HttpALot.java line 34:

> 32:  * @comment This test runs with -Dsun.net.httpserver.nodelay=true
> 33:  *          to enable TCP_NODELAY on the sockets "accept()"ed by the 
> HttpServer. This is
> 34:  *          to avoid occasional 40ms delays receiving responses from the 
> server on Linux.

Thanks for the update the bug tag and improving the comment. Just a minor nit 
is that you might want to re-flow it to avoid 1 short line and two longer 
lines. Ignore if you want.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10504

Reply via email to