Re: 3.0 branding - release plans - etc

On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 16:57 -0600, Duane Wessels wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 10 Sep 2006, Robert Collins wrote:
>
> > So, chatting with Adrian today, and some friends, I have some thoughts
> > about what precisely 3.0 should be.
> >
> > I think 3.0 STABLE1 when release should be:
> > * more functional than 2.6 STABLEX - there should be no regressions in
> > functionality.
> > * within 10-15% of the speed of 2.6 STABLEX.
>
> Does this mean +/- 10-15%?

If 2.6-LATEST_STABLE has a sustained request rate of 8000 4k requests
per second, then by 'within 10-15%' I mean:
3.0 should have a sustained request rate in the same scenario of no less
than 6800 4k requests per second.

> In order to meet the goal we'll need a measurable definition for
> "speed". I assume that you're thinking along the lines of sustained
> requests/second within some response time window? Which OS, and
> which filesystem options?

I think 2.6 and 3.0 should be relatively close on that - so say 'linux,
epoll, aufs'. Or perhaps we should have a few scenarios.

> > these two points are the primary things I can think of that will stop
> > people adopting squid-3.0. And what we want is for developers to feel
>
> I would probably put stability ahead of performance, but yes, assuming
> squid-3 is stable enough then people will expect it to perform at least
> as well as the old.

Yah, thats pretty much my feeling.

-Rob

-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.