\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
-The results of the tests performed.
+Our goal is to stress our implementation in order to determine if it is
+viable in terms of performance. In order to achieve this, we have compared our
+results with the \texttt{sendfile} system call. As already stated in Section
+\ref{sec:intro}, this function uses a zero-copy mechanism to avoid passing
+information from kernel space and back.
+
+\begin{table}
+ \begin{center}
+ \begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | c | c |}
+ \hline
+ Sent(MB) & \multicolumn{5}{|c|} {Time} \\
+ \cline{2-6}
+ & one peer & two peers & tree peers & six peers & eight peers\\
+ \hline
+ 32 & 4 & 10 & 18 & 49 & 61 \\
+ \hline
+ 64 & 10 & 20 & 35 & 80 & 115 \\
+ \hline
+ 128 & 20 & 42 & 58 & 226 & 347\\
+ \hline
+ 256 & 41 & 75 & 129 & 385 & 534 \\
+ \hline
+ \end{tabular}
+ \end{center}
+ \caption{Sendfile Results}
+ \label{sendfile-results}
+\end{table}
+
+Section \ref{sec:testing} largely details the test scenarios we have
+performed. Particularly, this is the test where we varied the number of peers
+from 1 to 8. The results gathered are displayed in Table \ref{sendfile-results}.
+We can easily observe that the time needed to send files of different size grows
+almost linearly, with a factor lower than 1. This was expected because for each
+peer, we execute at least one more \texttt{sendfile} system call.
+
+For the second test, we used our peer-to-peer kernel protocol for sending
+files on with sizes growing from 32MB up to 256MB. The number of peers used in
+this test was varied from 1 to 8. The results presented in Table,
+\ref{p2pkp-results}, show an almost linear growth of the time needed to send the
+files from sender to peers, but with a smaller factor than the one achieved in
+case of the \texttt{sendfile} system call. For small number of peers, one, two
+or three, \texttt{senfile} has a higher performance rate, but for a greater
+number of peers our implementation has better results.
+
+\begin{table}
+ \begin{center}
+ \begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | c | c |}
+ \hline
+ Sent(MB) & \multicolumn{5}{|c|} {Time} \\
+ \cline{2-6}
+ & one peer & two peers & tree peers & six peers & eight peers\\
+ \hline
+ 32 & 13 & 29 & 35 & 45 & 53 \\
+ \hline
+ 64 & 34 & 53 & 67 & 103 & 125 \\
+ \hline
+ 128 & 66 & 118 & 142 & 167 & 197 \\
+ \hline
+ 256 & 121 & 223 & 277 & 378 & 446 \\
+ \hline
+ \end{tabular}
+ \end{center}
+ \caption{P2PKP Results}
+ \label{p2pkp-results}
+\end{table}
+
+We have also compiled a graphic, shown in Figure \ref{fig:comp}, that better
+exposes the differences between \texttt{sendfile} and the P2PKP kernel module.
+As we can see, while the number of peers increase, our implementation
+overcomes the performance of \texttt{sendfile}.
+
+\begin{figure}[h!]
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{img/comparison.png}
+ \caption{\texttt{sendfile} vs P2PKP}
+ \label{fig:comp}
+\end{figure}