Generic reasons for recursive performance not to peg CPU?

[Stuart Browne]

Wouldn't it be something along the lines about recursive using cache-in-memory where the authoritative is using lookups of zone-in-memory?

The algorithms are probably different.  I've not looked at the code though.

Stuart

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bind-users-bounces+stuart.browne=ausregistry.com.au at lists.isc.org
> [mailto:bind-users-bounces+stuart.browne=ausregistry.com.au at lists.isc.org]
> On Behalf Of Doug Barton
> Sent: Monday, 13 January 2014 1:11 PM
> To: Leonard Mills; bind-users at lists.isc.org
> Subject: Re: Generic reasons for recursive performance not to peg CPU?
> 
> Thanks for the response, but you're answering a different question than
> I asked. :)  The question I'm interested in is, "Why is the recursive
> server not pegging the CPU?" I'm aware that there will be a difference
> in qps between auth-only and recursive, but the recursive server seems
> to be working a lot less hard than the auth server, and I can't figure
> out why.
> 
> Doug
> 
> 
> On 01/12/2014 06:07 PM, Leonard Mills wrote:
> > Are you allowing long answers when authoritative?  Performance
> > measurements with and without additional data in responses is measurable
> > (imo around 12% more network traffic from the replies on auth-only
> servers).
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
> unsubscribe from this list
> 
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users