nanos VS picohttpparser

Erlang on Xen was most definitely an inspiration behind what we're working on with https://nanos.org .

I am a bit confused, there are three sites:

* https://nanos.org/

* https://nanovms.com/

* https://ops.city/

And I am not sure what "thing" I am using. Is there some disambiguation? I know is OPS is the orchestration CLI, but I am confused at the difference between Nanos and NanoVMs. What should I call the section of my README that deals with this tech? Currently gone with Nanos/OPS but I am confused.

I work with https://nanos.org && https://ops.city - we can run thousands of these on commodity hardware.

Unik was just a build tool that utilized other projects like Rump, Mirage, IncludeOS, etc. It's now dead since Solo pivoted a very long time ago to service mesh/api gateways.

The GoRump port they use was from us and then we realized we needed to code our own from the ground up for many reasons so we wrote https://nanos.org (runs as a go unikernel in GCP).

A couple unikernel projects that caught my eye in the past may be of interest to you. I have no experience with them, so I can't speak to their quality though.

https://unikraft.org/

https://github.com/nanovms/nanos

Definitely agree with the top part, however, I should note that, ops, the tool's, whole existence is to create disk images and upload them to any cloud, any hypervisor.

In particular, both https://ops.city && https://nanos.org are Go unikernels running on GCP and their deploys take just a few seconds to push out. AWS can be even faster cause we skip the s3 upload part. We also have lots of people using Azure which would be utilizing vhdx.

I'm with that organization that works on https://nanos.org and https://ops.city . If you aren't a software engineer but still would like to use unikernels you're in luck - we also have a package repository at https://repo.ops.city/ (running as a go unikernel on GCP) that will allow you to run and deploy pre-made applications. If you don't see something that you'd like to us there's also a way of importing docker containers into unikernels via ops which works for most (but not all) applications.

Yea, it is definitely a fake HTTP server which I acknowledge in the article [1]. However based on the size of the requests, and my observation of the number of packets per second being symmetrical at the network interface level, I didn't have a concern about doubled responses.

Skipping the parsing of the HTTP requests definitely gives a performance boost, but for this comparison both sides got the same boost, so I didn't mind being less strict. Seastar's HTTP parser was being finicky, so I chose the easy route and just removed it from the equation.

For reference though, in my previous post[2] libreactor was able to hit 1.2M req/s while fully parsing the HTTP requests using picohttpparser[3]. But that is still a very simple and highly optimized implementation. From what I recall when I played with disabling HTTP parsing in libreactor I got a performance boost of about 5%.

1. https://talawah.io/blog/linux-kernel-vs-dpdk-http-performanc...

2. https://talawah.io/blog/extreme-http-performance-tuning-one-...

3. https://github.com/h2o/picohttpparser

Just-js is not nodejs framework. It's sperate runtime and most of the http code is written using c/c++ (for example headers parsing logic is written using c and is using https://github.com/h2o/picohttpparser which is c library)