[dns-operations] DNS software test!

延志伟 yzw_iplab at 163.com
Fri Sep 16 06:08:25 UTC 2011

Hi, all,

Recently, I tested the performance of BIND,NSD and UNBOUND. However, I am confused with the testing results. I list them here for your help.


Client executes the DNS query using ‘queryperf’ under the following four scenarios (where SA and TA denote the Second levelAuthority server andTop levelAuthority server respectively),their QPS results are:


153.521955 qps

Case2:Recursive (bind)à Root (bind)à TA (bind)à SA (nsd)

173.912569 qps

Case3:Recursive (bind)à Root (bind)à TA (nsd)à SA (bind)

1857.768915 qps

Case4:Recursive (bind)à Root (bind)à TA (nsd)à SA (nsd)

1923.845425 qps

The number of queries is 50000, and with A, AAAA and MX types randomly. In the zone file, TTL is set to 0, and then every query should be performed from root to the SA without the assistance of cache。

As you find, only when the NSD is deployed on the TA, the performance (e.g., QPS) can be promoted significantly. In other words, even when the SA uses the NSD, the QPS is just similar with the case when all the servers use BIND.


This same results appear when the recursive server uses UNBOUND. And the corresponding results is listed as following:

Case1:Recursive (unbound)à Root (bind)à TA (bind)à SA (bind)

254.047935 qps

Case2:Recursive (unbound)à Root (bind)à TA (bind)à SA (nsd)

293.855172 qps

Case3:Recursive (unbound)à Root (bind)à TA (nsd)à SA (bind)

14968.491326 qps

Case4:Recursive (unbound)à Root (bind)à TA (nsd)à SA (nsd)

15071.630940 qps


Thank you very much for your attention!

Zhiwei Yan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/attachments/20110916/7aefc0c7/attachment.html>

More information about the dns-operations mailing list