Tips / techniques for high-performance C# server sockets

Question

Socket I/O performance has improved in .NET 3.5 environment. You can use ReceiveAsync/SendAsync instead of BeginReceive/BeginSend for better performance. Chech this out:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb968780.aspx

A lot of this has to do with many threads running on your system and the kernel giving each of them a time slice. The design is simple, but does not scale well.

You probably should look at using Socket.BeginReceive which will execute on the .net thread pools (you can specify somehow the number of threads it uses), and then pushing onto a queue from the asynchronous callback ( which can be running in any of the .NET threads ). This should give you much higher performance.

A thread per client seems massively overkill, especially given the low overall CPU usage here. Normally you would want a small pool of threads to service all clients, using BeginReceive to wait for work async - then simply despatch the processing to one of the workers (perhaps simply by adding the work to a synchronized queue upon which all the workers are waiting).

I am not a C# guy by any stretch, but for high-performance socket servers the most scalable solution is to use I/O Completion Ports with a number of active threads appropriate for the CPU(s) the process s running on, rather than using the one-thread-per-connection model.

In your case, with an 8-core machine you would want 16 total threads with 8 running concurrently. (The other 8 are basically held in reserve.)

As others have suggested, the best way to implement this would be to make the client facing code all asynchronous. Use BeginAccept() on the TcpServer() so that you dont have to manually spawn a thread. Then use BeginRead()/BeginWrite() on the underlying network stream that you get from the accepted TcpClient.

However, there is one thing I dont understand here. You said that these are long lived connections, and a large number of clients. Assuming that the system has reached steady state, where you have your max clients (say 70) connected. You have 70 threads listening for the client packets. Then, the system should still be responsive. Unless your application has memory/handle leaks and you are running out of resources so that your server is paging. I would put a timer around the call to Accept() where you kick off a client thread and see how much time that takes. Also, I would start taskmanager and PerfMon, and monitor "Non Paged Pool", "Virtual Memory", "Handle Count" for the app and see whether the app is in a resource crunch.

While it is true that going Async is the right way to go, I am not convinced if it will really solve the underlying problem. I would monitor the app as I suggested and make sure there are no intrinsic problems of leaking memory and handles. In this regard, "BigBlackMan" above was right - you need more instrumentation to proceed. Dont know why he was downvoted.

The Socket.BeginConnect and Socket.BeginAccept are definitely useful. I believe they use the ConnectEx and AcceptEx calls in their implementation. These calls wrap the initial connection negotiation and data transfer into one user/kernel transition. Since the initial send/recieve buffer is already ready the kernel can just send it off - either to the remote host or to userspace.

They also have a queue of listeners/connectors ready which probably gives a bit of boost by avoiding the latency involved with userspace accepting/receiving a connection and handing it off (and all the user/kernel switching).

To use BeginConnect with a buffer it appears that you have to write the initial data to the socket before connecting.