Sorry, might be off topic.. but i'm a big fan of the CSS here
A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
11–20 of 24 posts
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#12I ran my own Pi0w site through the test to see how it compares. About 35% of the time is spent on SSL, similar to what this person saw.
I'm not going to remove SSL, but I'm surprised it is such a big part of the page load.
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#13Great write up. The look and feel of this website gave me nostalgia.
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#14It seems to me that this is mostly benchmarking the performance of the (low bandwidth, high latency) DSL uplink, not the Raspberry Pi. " I have seen it dynamically compress and serve at a sustained 2.7 times per second a small webpage " You should be able to get a lot more performance out of a Rasperry Pi 3 than that! It has similar capacity to the 2000-era workhorse Sun E450 https://fanf.livejournal.com/141066.html
Yeah these numbers seem way off. I did some stress tests for my thesis and was able to get 20-90 requests per second served from a Raspberry Pi 2 running a PHP website with a PostgreSQL database, depending on the complexity of the page. An equivalent site programmed in Elixir fared even better. With plain Nginx serving a static HTML file, I could hit 1000 requests per second. So it does seem the bottleneck here is th…
TLS probably adds significant latency here. Was your 1k RPS with TLS?
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#15It seems to me that this is mostly benchmarking the performance of the (low bandwidth, high latency) DSL uplink, not the Raspberry Pi. " I have seen it dynamically compress and serve at a sustained 2.7 times per second a small webpage " You should be able to get a lot more performance out of a Rasperry Pi 3 than that! It has similar capacity to the 2000-era workhorse Sun E450 https://fanf.livejournal.com/141066.html
Hah! I worked at a startup that deployed several E450's (and their smaller cousins, the E250's.) It's amazing how far we've come with hardware.
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#16I ran my own Pi0w site through the test to see how it compares. About 35% of the time is spent on SSL, similar to what this person saw. I'm not going to remove SSL, but I'm surprised it is such a big part of the page load.
Are you using RSA or ECDSA certificates? RSA signing is a lot more difficult than ECDSA signing. If you're concerned about compatability with older clients, you can have dual certificates, but that can be more time consuming to setup.
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah these numbers seem way off. I did some stress tests for my thesis and was able to get 20-90 requests per second served from a Raspberry Pi 2 running a PHP website with a PostgreSQL database, depending on the complexity of the page. An equivalent site programmed in Elixir fared even better. With plain Nginx serving a static HTML file, I could hit 1000 requests per second. So it does seem the bottleneck here is th…
TLS probably adds significant latency here. Was your 1k RPS with TLS?
People measuring RPS (requests per second) are rarely measuring CPS (connections per second), so the TLS setup overhead would be amortized across numerous requests.
A single webpage will often load a number of asset files over the same underlying connection, so it's not like CPS is the single, entirely accurate measure and RPS is just bad or something... they're both valid, interesting numbers.
Even then, TLS setup isn't that expensive, in my opinion. Someone else here mentioned 35% overhead from TLS on a Raspberry Pi, which seems high to me... but it would still be orders of magnitude better performance than what the original article on this thread was claiming.
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#18Not really stressing the parts which substantially improved in the Pi 4, so not that surprising that the results aren't drastically better. If you can use USB 3.0, saturate a GbE link or use lots of memory then the Pi 4 is a big upgrade.
It works surprisingly well as a Plex server.
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#19Not really stressing the parts which substantially improved in the Pi 4, so not that surprising that the results aren't drastically better. If you can use USB 3.0, saturate a GbE link or use lots of memory then the Pi 4 is a big upgrade.
It works surprisingly well as a Plex server.
Consider Jellyfin instead of Plex :)
Re: A Page Load Time Comparison of Raspberry Pi 3 and 4 Web Servers
#20Not really stressing the parts which substantially improved in the Pi 4, so not that surprising that the results aren't drastically better. If you can use USB 3.0, saturate a GbE link or use lots of memory then the Pi 4 is a big upgrade.
That's one thing I hope the Pi 4 successor will improve on: MicroSD for the on-board storage is a terrible medium, and I cross my fingers we see it replaced by a m.2 slot.