IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] [xmpp] i18n intro, Sunday 14:00-16:00

Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Fri, 22 July 2011 15:44 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@cridland.net>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BBB321F8B33; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:44:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.098, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id puzmNQdbtw+N; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:44:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from peirce.dave.cridland.net (peirce.dave.cridland.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f09:882:2e0:81ff:fe29:d16a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFCC921F8B32; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 08:44:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (peirce.dave.cridland.net [127.0.0.1]) by peirce.dave.cridland.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB19E1168087; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 16:44:39 +0100 (BST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at peirce.dave.cridland.net
Received: from peirce.dave.cridland.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (peirce.dave.cridland.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hZUmzvipEKQ2; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 16:44:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from puncture (puncture.dave.cridland.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f09:882:221:85ff:fe3f:1696]) by peirce.dave.cridland.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A683E1168067; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 16:44:35 +0100 (BST)
References: <CA4EF2B9.C0B4%joe.hildebrand@webex.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA4EF2B9.C0B4%joe.hildebrand@webex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <9031.1311349475.663904@puncture>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 16:44:35 +0100
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: Joe Hildebrand <joe.hildebrand@webex.com>, General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, XMPP Working Group <xmpp@ietf.org>, "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; delsp="yes"; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [xmpp] i18n intro, Sunday 14:00-16:00
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:44:41 -0000

On Fri Jul 22 16:26:17 2011, Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> On 7/22/11 1:50 AM, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>  
> wrote:
> 
> >> First some assumptions:
> >> - Stringprep is currently one of the performance hotspots of  
> some XMPP
> >> servers.
> >
> > Is that an assumption backed by facts or a wild guess?
> 
> I can only talk definitively about one server, but yes, I've got  
> data to
> back up that assumption for that one server.

I have no opinion on NFC versus NFD, but on this specific point it is  
true for our server as well, and I'm aware of at least one other  
server for which stringprep is a key area of CPU usage (Not Joe's).

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave@cridland.net - xmpp:dwd@dave.cridland.net
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email