[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Performance tests, openldap slapd vs netscape slapd
Jeff Weinheimer wrote:
> I have been interested in a performance comparison between the openldap
> slapd and the netscape slapd servers. So I wrote a program in c which
> allows me to add and delete directories of arbitrary sizes and to time
> For the test, the minimal cache was chosen (netscape has a lower limit on
> the allowed cache size). That is, each servers cache was set to 1000
> entries and 500k bytes. This should have minimal impact on the search
> results since almost 23000 entries must be searched for the whole tree.
> The results(Athlon 650, Redhat Linux 6.1):
> openLdap netscape
> AddEntry 1-10 entries/second 25-45 entries/second
> DeleteEntry 10-30 entries/second 40-45 entries/second
> Search 5700 searches/second 2600 searches/second
> DataRead 750 entries/second 800 entries/second
> *DataRead corresponds to the number of entries returned per second after the
> search was complete.
> Overall I found that it takes much longer to add to the openLDAP slapd than
> netscapes, but that the searches in openldap were twice as fast. This of
> course if perfectly acceptable since the idea behind LDAP is mostly reading
> and rarely writing.
> One odd thing that I did encounter was with the time it took to add
> entries for openldap. At first, as more entries were added, it took longer
> and longer to add them to the database. Then at some point(maybe 4000
> entries) it started taking less and less time to add entries. This seems a
> bit odd to me. Does anyone have an explanation for this?
> Any comments on the tests?
> Has anyone else done similar performance tests?
I did test on Solaris 2.6 with 100k entry using the directory resource kit from
Netscape (freeware stuff) which contains performance measurements tools.
I don't have the details but I remember that for searches the Netscape server
was definitely faster than openldap
the rest of data as far as I remember was something similar