Performance
In the below list, we will list performance comparsion between WProxy(version 3.0) and squid(2.6 for windows) in different testcases.
1. Single Connection
Single connection made via "wget" to a non-caching webpage.
Squid
WProxy
For single connections to non-caching webpages, squid is slightly faster than WProxy.
2. Benchmark(non-caching webpage)
Benchmark tests to a non-caching webpage.
Squid
| Concurrent connections |
Request per connection |
Time |
| 1 |
10 |
1.90 s |
| 20 |
10 |
5.41 s |
| 50 |
10 |
12.77 s |
WProxy
| Concurrent connections |
Request per connection |
Time |
| 1 |
10 |
2.02 s |
| 20 |
10 |
3.11 s s |
| 50 |
10 |
4.00 s |
Squid performances better when concurrent connections are less than 20, however, WProxy is better for more concurrent connections.
3. Benchmark(cached webpage)
Benchmark tests to a cached webpage.
Squid
| Concurrent connections |
Request per connection |
Time |
| 1 |
10 |
1.11 s |
| 20 |
10 |
3.54 s |
| 50 |
10 |
8.87 s |
WProxy
| Concurrent connections |
Request per connection |
Time |
| 1 |
10 |
4.28 s |
| 20 |
10 |
4.64 s |
| 50 |
10 |
6.00 s |
Squid and WProxy performance in a same level, WProxy will be slightly faster for more concurent connections.
Various proxy services: HTTP proxy, SOCKS, SMTP proxy, POP3 proxy.
