----- Original Message -----
> On 09/03/2014 08:51 AM, Michael Goulish wrote:
> > That point is where I seem to find the best performance on my
> > system: 123,500 messages per second received. ( i.e. 247,000
> > transfers per second ) using about 180% CPU ( i.e. 90% each of
> > 2 processors. )
>
> If you are sending direct between the sender and receiver process (i.e.
> no intermediary process), then why are you doubling the number of
> messages sent to get 'transfers per second'? One transfer is the sending
> of a message from one process to another, which in this case is the same
> as messages sent or received.
>
Yes, this is interesting.
I need a way to make a fair comparison between something like this setup
(simple peer-to-peer) and the Dispatch Router numbers I was getting
earlier.
For the router, the analogous topology is
writer --> router --> reader
in which case I counted each message twice.
But it does not seem right to count a single message in
writer --> router --> reader
as "2 transfers", while counting a single message in
writer --> reader
as only "1 transfer".
Because -- from the application point of view, those two topologies
are doing the same work.
Also I think that I *need* to count writer-->router-->reader
as "2", because in *this* case:
writer --> router --> reader_1
\
\--> reader_2
...I need to count that as "3" .
? Thoughts ?
