bind 9.3.0 performance problem on x86 Linux
foo at bar.baz.invalid
Mon Jan 10 18:52:17 UTC 2005
Brad Knowles <brad at stop.mail-abuse.org> wrote:
> Rick Jones (from HP) is the acknowledged master in this field,
That is a truely frightening thought.
> but I've also done some benchmarking in this area myself (see
> <http://www.shub-internet.org/brad/papers/dnscomparison/>), and your
> numbers are about the highest I've ever seen for BIND 9. Indeed,
> your numbers are the highest I've ever seen for any nameserver on
> any platform (including Rick's testing of Nominum's CNS and my own
> testing of NSD).
I've seen 58K on caching-only workloads with CNS on an HP lp2000r
which was a 2P machine, with something like 1.mumbleGHz P III's, so a
later dlmumble or an rx4640 getting better numbers isn't _too_
surprising - also considering what I mention below.
> Can you share more details of your testing configuration with
> us? Are you and Rick going to publish another white paper on
> nameserver performance measurement on HP hardware?
I'm not presently on tap to produce a DNS perf writeup, but do want to
get back into that when I can.
More information about the bind-users