Hello!

On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 12:34:20PM -0400, ddutra wrote:

[...]

> Scenario three - The same page, saved as .html and server by nginx
>
> Transactions: 1799 hits
> Availability: 100.00 %
> Elapsed time: 120.00 secs
> Data transferred: 25.33 MB
> Response time: 2.65 secs
> Transaction rate: 14.99 trans/sec
> Throughput: 0.21 MB/sec
> Concurrency: 39.66
> Successful transactions: 1799
> Failed transactions: 0
> Longest transaction: 5.21
> Shortest transaction: 1.30
>
>
> Here is the main question. This is a huge difference. I mean, AFAIK serving
> from cache is supposed to be as fast as serving a static .html file, right?
> I mean - nginx sees that there is a cache rule for location and sees that
> there is a cached version, serves it. Why so much difference?

The 15 requests per second for a static file looks utterly slow,
and first of all you may want to find out what's a limiting factor
in this case. This will likely help to answer the question "why
the difference".

From what was previously reported here - communication with EC2
via external ip address may be very slow, and using 127.0.0.1
instead used to help.

--
Maxim Dounin
http://nginx.org/en/donation.html

_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx