doytsujin / 10kthreads

Show that handling 10k threads with thread per connection is possible

Is thread per connection scalable?

Summary

A simple echo server using thread per connection, that scales to 10K concurrent connections. A client and a reference asynchronous (libevent-like) implementation are provided.

$ make
gcc -c -Wall  10kthreads.c -o obj/10kthreads.o
gcc -c -Wall   rusage.c -o obj/rusage.o
gcc -Wall  -pthread  obj/10kthreads.o obj/rusage.o -o bin/10kthreads
(cd $(dirname ref_async_server/10kthreads.go);go build -o ../bin/ref_async_server)
(cd $(dirname client/conc_tcp_client.go);go build -o ../bin/client)
Success
$ ./bin/10kthreads # start echo server on localhost:1234
$ ./bin/client -n 100 # client to localhost:1234 with 100 concurrent connections
$ ./bin/ref_async_server # start asynchronous echo server

Background

When a server waits for connection, it usually needs to handle more than one concurrent connection. In order to do that you can either use select like mechanism with asynchronous io, something like:

active_conn = {}
server = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET,
    socket.SOCK_STREAM)
server.bind((host,port)) 
server.listen(backlog) 
while true:
    in, out, ex = select.select(active_conn+server,
        [],[])
    if server_has_new_conn(server, in):
        addClient(online_conn)
    else:
        handleConn(in, out, active_conn)

Whenever handleConn wishes to write or read from the socket, it'll do so asynchronously, and go back to the main loop.

Another option is to spawn a thread for each concurrent connection. Keep everything synchrounous, but spawn a thread for every new request.

server = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET,
    socket.SOCK_STREAM)
server.bind((host,port)) 
server.listen(backlog)
while true:
    client, addr = server.accept()
    thread.start_new_thread(handler, client)

The common wisdom about select vs threads is, that the epoll based techniques is faster than spawning a thread for each request. People far wiser than me has dispelled this myth.

But an online PDF is not as convincing as running code

Code

Source

This repository contains three executables.

In the main directory is the 10kthreads TCP echo server, which simply spawns a thread for every new request.

In client directory there's a Go (golang) async clients that opens N concurrent connections, and verify they all echo a short string back to the client.

In ref_async_server there's a simple Go (golang) echo server, relying on Go's internal dispatcher (which in turn is using asynchronous read and epoll).

Execution

Note that in order to actually have 10K concurrent connections, you must set the ulimit accordingly. The easiest way to do that is to login as root, and use ulimit -n:

$ sudo su -
# ulimit -n 10100
# ./bin/10kthreads >/tmp/server.out &
[1] 16358
# ./bin/client -n 10000
Max conc: 10000
total: 10000
conc: 0
# kill -SIGINT %1
# cat /tmp/server.out
EXITING
resident 
434176
Max conc: 10000
Total: 1000
Now: 0
[1]+  Done                    ./bin/10kthreads > /tmp/server

To change ulimit for a specific user see /etc/security/limits.conf or /etc/launchd.conf in Mac OS X.

Max conc, is the maximum concurrent sockets alive as recorded by the server or client, total is the total number of connections opened.

Bugs and TODO

On high contention client sometimes stalls, a single thread is waiting at epoll, and the rest are holding a futex, probablly waiting on the WaitGroup to die.

The size of the stack for each thread should be determinable by command line arguments.

Origin

A very experience colleague has told me once, that one can't use a thread per-connection model for handling connections.

• "You must use some sort of epoll or select, it wouldn't work otherwise!
• "Why? What would happen if I use a thread per connection?"
• "It wouldn't work, why won't you just try it and let me know?"

So I tried it.