http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=311185


in reply to Re: Re: Unable to complete download with Net::FTP
in thread Unable to complete download with Net::FTP

Here's the benchmark. I'd love some help interpreting it, because I don't know what to make of this. Visually, using an LWP get() used up the most memory, but I can't grok the huge difference in wall-clock time. Incidentally, to avoid spamming my favourite genomic-annotation provider I tested a much smaller file (about 10k). I don't think I could really run a a test with more than 10 iterations on any of the bigger files, so if FTP has a long connect lag at the front, a larger file might make it more competitive.

The code:

use strict; use Benchmark; use Net::FTP; use LWP::Simple; sub lwp_simple { my $data = get('ftp://ftp.ncbi.nih.gov/refseq/LocusLink/LL.out_x +l.gz'); my $outfile = '>GO_TERMS.CSV'; if (!$data) { } open(OUT, '>LL_tmpl.gz'); binmode OUT; print OUT $data; close(OUT); sleep 1; } sub net_ftp { my $ftp; if (!($ftp = Net::FTP->new('ftp.ncbi.nih.gov', Debug=>0))) { print "Couldn't log-in"; return; }; $ftp->login('anonymous', 'anon@anon.com'); $ftp->cwd('/refseq/LocusLink/'); $ftp->type('binary'); $ftp->get('LL.out_xl.gz'); $ftp->quit(); sleep 1; } sub lwp_getstore { my $url = 'ftp://ftp.ncbi.nih.gov/refseq/LocusLink/LL.out_xl.gz'; my $file = 'LL.out_xl.gz'; getstore($url, $file); sleep 1; } timethese(100, { 'LWP' => \&lwp_simple, 'FTP' => \&net_ftp, 'LWP-Store' => \&lwp_getstore } );

The results:

Benchmark: timing 100 iterations of FTP, LWP, LWP-Store... FTP: 4011 wallclock secs ( 2.31 usr + 2.68 sys = 5.00 CPU) @ 20.01/s (n=100) LWP: 933 wallclock secs ( 4.05 usr + 4.87 sys = 8.92 CPU) @ 11.21/s (n=100) LWP-Store: 340 wallclock secs ( 4.11 usr + 3.70 sys = 7.81 CPU) @ 12.80/s (n=100)
-Tats