[Unbound-users] Performance of Caching Name Servers

Wouter Wijngaards wouter at NLnetLabs.nl
Fri Jun 13 12:02:40 UTC 2008

Hash: SHA1


I think the up-level nameserver is your problem. It is causing these
results. To get the uplevel server to be the same, you can stop and
start the uplevel nameserver between tests. Otherwise the test is not
fair (either way).

Of course, you are still left with the uplevel server talking to the
servers on the internet that change everytime. To fix that you can run
your own authority server that is queried.

Best regards,
~   Wouter

蔡述宪 schreef:
| Hi, Wouter
|   Thanks a lot for your suggestion!
|   The machine is an Intel dual-core CPU. I'll try to increase
| num-threads and see if it works.
|   About the queries I send. Yes, I use the same datafile and send the
| same queries in both Unbound and Bind cases. But actually I don't know
| what kind of queries list is the best and how to generate a good one. So
| I just use a long list of website names. :(
|   And I configured the machine to forward all queries to the up level
| DNS server.
| On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Wouter Wijngaards <wouter at nlnetlabs.nl
| <mailto:wouter at nlnetlabs.nl>> wrote:
| Hi,
| Is the machine a multi cpu, multi-core machine? You can increase
| num-threads in the config file.
| Are you sure that both bind and unbound are treated the same by resperf?
| What does resperf measure (what queries does it send?)
| What is the bind configuration that you use and what is the unbound
| configuration that you use? Are they acting as full resolvers, or do
| they forward to another host?
| Best regards,
| ~   Wouter
| !
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the Unbound-users mailing list