-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
README benchmarks #139
Comments
I don't get you... what do you mean by "wrong way around"? |
Copied: aioftp 0.8.0 STOR (client -> server) 284.95 MB/sec pyftpdlib 1.5.2 STOR (client -> server) 1235.56 MB/sec This appears to say that pyftpdlib has consistently higher throughput and lower latency |
Here is same question I think: #57 |
Hm, OK, I was clearly misapprehending, sorry. I wonder if you could find benchmarks that was "fairer"? In any case, do you have benchmarks from the client side? |
It's not «unfair» it's just caching. That benchmark good side is that it written by pyftpdlib guys, so no code from my side. Client side have no benchmarks. |
If I were you, I would make the difference plain, else people will get the impression that this library should not be used. I would also say that the benchmarks you run were designed for and by pyftpdlib (and you didn't want to duplicate the effort).
Can there be? Is it actually possible to have several files transferring concurrently with a client to a single server? |
@martindurant if you have any ideas to improve "benchmark" part of readme, then feel free to make a PR. Speed is not the main goal of For client benchmarking, I'm not sure you need it, since the bottleneck is networkn in 99% cases. You can concurrently download from one server with multiple clients, but if server do not throttle your download, then there is no effort for this. |
Do you have the numbers the wrong way around at https://github.com/aio-libs/aioftp#server-benchmark ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: