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.

A Performance Evaluation of Hyper Text Transfer Protocols

Version 1.1 of the Hyper Text Transfer Protocol (HTTP) was principally developed as a means for reducing both document transfer latency and network traffic. The rationale for the performance enhancements in HTTP/1.1 is based on the assumption that the network is the bottleneck in Web transactions. In practice, however, the Web server can be the primary source of document transfer latency. In this paper, we characterize and compare the performance of HTTP/1.0 and HTTP/1.1 in terms of throughput at the server and transfer latency at the client. Our approach is based on considering a broader set of bottlenecks in an HTTP transfer; we examine how bottlenecks in the network, CPU, and in the disk system affect the relative performance of HTTP/1.0 versus HTTP/1.1. We show that the network demands under HTTP/1.1 are somewhat lower than HTTP/1.0, and we quantify those differences in terms of packets transferred, server congestion window size and data bytes per packet. We show that when the CPU is the bottleneck, there is relatively little difference in performance between HTTP/1.0 and HTTP/1.1. Surprisingly, we show that when the disk system is the bottleneck, performance using HTTP/1.1 can be much worse than with HTTP/1.0. Based on these observations, we suggest a connection management policy for HTTP/1.1 that can improve throughput, decrease latency, and keep network traffic low when the disk system is the bottleneck.