Measuring the Behavior of a World-Wide Web Server

Server performance has become a crucial issue for improving the overall performance of the World-Wide Web. This paper describes Webmonitor, a tool for evaluating and understanding server performance, and presents new results for a realistic workload. Webmonitor measures activity and resource consumption, both within the kernel and in HTTP processes running in user space. Webmonitor is implemented using an efficient combination of sampling and event-driven techniques that exhibit low overhead. Our initial implementation is for the Apache World-Wide Web server running on the Linux operating system. We demonstrate the utility of Webmonitor by measuring and understanding the performance of a Pentium-based PC acting as a dedicated WWW server. Our workload uses a file size distribution with a heavy tail. This captures the fact that Web servers must concurrently handle some requests for large audio and video files, and a large number of requests for small documents, containing text or images. Our results show that in a Web server saturated by client requests, over 90% of the time spent handling HTTP requests is spent in the kernel. Furthermore, keeping TCP connections open, as required by TCP, causes a factor of 2-9 increase in the elapsed time required to service an HTTP request. Data gathered from Webmonitor provide insight into the causes of this performance penalty. Specifically, we observe a significant increase in resource consumption along three dimensions: the number of HTTP processes running at the same time, CPU utilization, and memory utilization. These results emphasize the important role of operating system and network protocol implementation in determining Web server performance.

Connection Scheduling in Web Servers

Under high loads, a Web server may be servicing many hundreds of connections concurrently. In traditional Web servers, the question of the order in which concurrent connections are serviced has been left to the operating system. In this paper we ask whether servers might provide better service by using non-traditional service ordering. In particular, for the case when a Web server is serving static files, we examine the costs and benefits of a policy that gives preferential service to short connections. We start by assessing the scheduling behavior of a commonly used server (Apache running on Linux) with respect to connection size and show that it does not appear to provide preferential service to short connections. We then examine the potential performance improvements of a policy that does favor short connections (shortest-connection-first). We show that mean response time can be improved by factors of four or five under shortest-connection-first, as compared to an (Apache-like) size-independent policy. Finally we assess the costs of shortest-connection-first scheduling in terms of unfairness (i.e., the degree to which long connections suffer). We show that under shortest-connection-first scheduling, long connections pay very little penalty. This surprising result can be understood as a consequence of heavy-tailed Web server workloads, in which most connections are small, but most server load is due to the few large connections. We support this explanation using analysis.