Re: [Sipping] [dispatch] SIP-CLF: Results on ASCII vs. binary representation

[Theo Zourzouvillys <theo at crazygreek.co.uk>]

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Vijay K. Gurbani
<vkg at alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

> 1) On some systems, the value of IOV_MAX is set to a low number.

(1) is irrelivant.  scatther/gather is not the only optimal method of
implementing it.  even on crappy old OSes, a simple memcpy() of the
data is similar in performance, cache coherency caveat emptor:

  http://dev.voip.co.uk/~theo/write-clf.theo2.txt

Binary: 0m7.400s
ASCII: 0m7.038s

> (1) is a real concern because as you can well imagine that URIs,
> once parsed, can be composed of many different objects (or
> structs in C.)  As such, the representation of a composed URI
> in a iov structure will require multiple indexes.

i'd argue your concerns are moot - a URI composed of many different
objects will need to be built into a string if it's ASCII anyway.

to be honest, i through they took the performance card out of the pack
so it couldn't be used any more in 2002 - if logging is causing you
scalability problems, you've got far more to worry about than that.
plus, any implementation not running on a modern OS is going to have
other missing features needed for performance improvements outside of
writev()'s limitations

(ps: i'm not too concerned about binary/ascii - although i lean toward
the binary side - please just don't use performance as an argument
unless the figures are fair. pretty please!)

 ~ Theo

-- 
http://twitter.com/zourzouvillys
http://crazygreek.co.uk/