Benchmark

[tinganho]

Do you have any benchmark on how this lib performs?

[mattgodbolt]

Not as yet, no. It's definitely not engineered for speed, but I'd be happy to move it in that direction if that would be useful for others.

[mattgodbolt]

From Csaba Csoma: " To get a feel for how it works I ran a "siege" on Ubuntu 14.04: siege -b -c 100 -r 90 --log=/dev/null http://127.0.0.1:9090/

I got around 1k transactions/sec, about 10% of what I expected (+ some errors too). Is this normal, or I did something wrong and I should dig more?

The server is now under siege... [error] socket: read error Connection reset by peer sock.c:479: Connection reset by peer done.

Transactions: 8999 hits Availability: 99.99 % Elapsed time: 7.51 secs Data transferred: 2.98 MB Response time: 0.03 secs Transaction rate: 1198.27 trans/sec Throughput: 0.40 MB/sec Concurrency: 32.44 Successful transactions: 8999 Failed transactions: 1 Longest transaction: 4.22 Shortest transaction: 0.00

This is what kore reported (11.6k/sec) on the same laptop:

Transactions: 9000 hits Availability: 100.00 % Elapsed time: 0.77 secs Data transferred: 1.98 MB Response time: 0.01 secs Transaction rate: 11688.31 trans/sec Throughput: 2.57 MB/sec Concurrency: 94.27 Successful transactions: 9000 Failed transactions: 0 Longest transaction: 0.02 Shortest transaction: 0.00 "

[csoma]

A bit more details on the tests: https://github.com/csoma/Cpp-SpeedTest

[hoytech]

Not that I put much stock in these artificial benchmarks, but it might be interesting to port seasocks to this benchmark:

https://github.com/uWebSockets/uWebSockets/tree/master/benchmarks

[mattgodbolt]

I'm going to close this: again Seasocks isn't really about performance, more just general handiness in particular situations. Thanks all.