On 3/21/19 9:02 PM, Daniel Stenberg wrote:

>> If my understanding is correct, it seems to me that I could underfeed
>> libcurl with my "second implementation". Ie, if I give curl only 8
>> handles at a time, while the server would be OK to have 16 downloads
>> multiplexed, then I'm doing poorly...
>
> Well, perhaps, You then assume that you need many streams to be
> effective, while a server typically can saturate a pipe fine with a
> single stream if it just has the data. There's nothing that says you
> get a higher total bandwidth with 16 streams than with 8 or 4.
>
> Of course you might have some insights into the server end of things
> for this use case and can make an educated guess, but then maybe you
> can then also make an educated guess on how many parallel transfers to
> keep?

Well, I think I don't really understand how this multiplex thing works.
I though the more parallelism the better, since in my case I have a LOT
of small files to download. But maybe it's not that simple. At least
that's what you answer hints :)

Anyway, if I want to understand about performances, there's nothing
better than running some tests and measuring.

Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer, and long live to libcurl,

  Arnaud

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: https://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette: https://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
Received on 2019-03-23