Re: Linux still surfs slower than Windows

From: ray (ray_at_zianet.com)
Date: 02/21/05 

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:14:31 -0700

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 09:40:19 -0800, Chris Carlen wrote:

> ray wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 17:15:22 -0800, Chris Carlen wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Bill Marcum wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 19:40:08 -0800, Chris Carlen
>>>> <crobc@BOGUSFIELD.sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Any further suggestions how to improve things would be appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Increase the size of the browser cache?
>>>
>>>
>>>No. That wouldn't explain why the Linux browser chokes on any given
>>>page when the cache is cleared, while the Win2k browser flies when the
>>>cache is also cleared.
>>>
>>>I am convinced there is a DNS lookup problem, where the SBC servers
>>>don't work smoothly with Linux requests. The technical details of why
>>>this could be so are beyond my knowledge. I would welcome anyone who
>>>could explain this, as it would seem incredibly important if such a
>>>discrepancy is possible, for the community to have collective awareness
>>>of it and how to affect workarounds.
>>>
>>>
>>>I have optimized my surfing speed experience through other workarounds,
>>>but none of which resolve the fundamental problem, which persists if I
>>>leave the browsers in their default configurations, and both OSes wset
>>>up with the same DNS configurations.
>>>
>>>I still wish I could resolve this fundamental problem.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Good day!
>>
>>
>>
>> I've been following this issue for some time, and it appears that certain
>> DNS servers do not catch the first or second request from Linux computers
>> although it seems they do work properly with MS requests. I have not
>> confirmed, but I guess there is some small imcompatibility with the DNS
>> requests. I would bet the servers at fault are running MS and not strictly
>> following standards.
>
> Thanks for the input.
>
> This sort of thinking, proposing meaningful hypotheses, is what I am
> hoping to elicit here. As I madee clear in my OP, the systems being
> compared are configured very much the same, and it appears you have
> thoroughly read my OP and so avoided proposing the obvious fixes that
> I've already tried.
>
> Thus, observed differences must be caused by some real inconsistencies
> between the way the OSes handle network requests, and thus how servers
> respond to them.
>
> At this point, I would want to take a theory such as yours, and perform
> experiments to try to verify if it is the right explanation. Once the
> real problem is found we can try to find a workaround.
>
> I am hoping some networking experts can propose actions to take to
> perhaps actually *measure* the DNS resolution times, or perhaps using
> tcpdump or other tools, see if there are differences between the way the
> two OSes are doing things.
>
>
> Good day!

That's on my list of things to look into when I have a slow day.
Unfortunately, it's likely to take some digging.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: apache httpd performance
    ... Both servers share same dns server, so I do not think that the DNS can be issue. ... We'd be better off ignoring the Linux results entirely and simply try instead to optimize your FreeBSD performance. ... My big surprise was that CPU: AMD Athlon64 Processor 3200+ can't handle 100 concurrent requests normally e.g. the load on the servers goes very high, and the server does not respond very well during the test. ...
    (freebsd-performance)
  • Re: Using external IP/DNS name for accessing internal resources
    ... Is 100.100.100.100 an IP owned by ISA (used for publishing ... When the proxy relays the requests to other servers, ...
    (microsoft.public.isa.publishing)
  • Re: What is this?
    ... >This event is generated when TCP traffic to port 0 is detected. ... This fails on a properly set up firewall. ... accessible DNS servers - one in the DMZ, and two located at our upstream. ... All internal DNS requests go to servers behind the firewall, ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Memory Manager Tests - using 512 Threads
    ... > In this test, Clients are virtualy flooding the Server with requests, ... > Thread pool in RTC is growing on-demand, ... > long-running requests won't block the rest of the communication. ... > I've set up the Default value to 256, which is what most Web Servers ...
    (borland.public.delphi.thirdpartytools.general)
  • Re: CAO remoting and Web gardens
    ... If your client can access the web servers directly (as opposed to only ... > I fully understand the concept of web gardens as relates to worker ... > My observations indicate that when a CAO is marshaled, ... >> to spin up several distinct processes to handle your requests. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.remoting)