Re: [racket-users] Racket Web servlet performance benchmarked and compared

2017-09-02 Thread Neil Van Dyke
dbohdan wrote on 09/02/2017 03:12 PM: I rather like the SCGI protocol. It's a pity that it isn't as widely supported as FastCGI, considering that it's much simpler to implement (second only to plain old CGI), but still has a performance profile similar to FastCGI's. I mostly implemented

Re: [racket-users] Racket Web servlet performance benchmarked and compared

2017-09-02 Thread dbohdan
On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 8:19:19 PM UTC+3, dbohdan wrote: > My exceptions were [...] This, of course, should say "expectations". On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 9:38:25 PM UTC+3, Neil Van Dyke wrote: > Thank you very much for doing this work, D. Bohdan. You're welcome! I had fun doing

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket Web servlet performance benchmarked and compared

2017-09-02 Thread Piyush Katariya
Thanks for the clarification. On 03-Sep-2017 12:31 AM, "George Neuner" wrote: > > On 9/2/2017 1:46 PM, Piyush Katariya wrote: > >> Does Racket app make use of all CPU cores by having multiple processes ? >> > > If it is written to use "places", which are parallel instances

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket Web servlet performance benchmarked and compared

2017-09-02 Thread George Neuner
On 9/2/2017 1:46 PM, Piyush Katariya wrote: Does Racket app make use of all CPU cores by having multiple processes ? If it is written to use "places", which are parallel instances of the Racket VM that run on separate kernel threads.

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket Web servlet performance benchmarked and compared

2017-09-02 Thread Piyush Katariya
Then it might not be a fair benchmark with a comparison to other Platforms. Isnt it ? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket Web servlet performance benchmarked and compared

2017-09-02 Thread Philip McGrath
The Racket web server does not make use of multiple CPU cores, but with stateless continuations you can run multiple instances behind a reverse proxy. See https://groups.google.com/d/topic/racket-users/TC4JJnZo1U8/discussion ("it is exactly node.js without callbacks"). -Philip On Sat, Sep 2,

[racket-users] Re: Racket Web servlet performance benchmarked and compared

2017-09-02 Thread Piyush Katariya
Just curious ... Does Racket app make use of all CPU cores by having multiple processes ? In go app, there isnt any need to becoz golang runtime uses all CPU avialble by default. So is the case with JVM and Erlang VM -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: [racket-users] Choose Language menu too Long when selecting Legacy languages

2017-09-02 Thread Srinivas K
Thank you for the suggestion. It works this way and I can atleast Click Okay if I open Other languages accidentally. Hope they fix it. On Saturday, 2 September 2017 18:07:30 UTC+5:30, Royall Spence wrote: > Looks like the resize handles on the edge of the window don't do > anything. Until

Re: [racket-users] Choose Language menu too Long when selecting Legacy languages

2017-09-02 Thread 'Royall Spence' via Racket Users
Looks like the resize handles on the edge of the window don't do anything. Until that's corrected (if it can be), the X window system allows you to hold and click anywhere in a window to drag it around the screen. Hopefully that'll allow you to drag the top portion off the screen and click the

[racket-users] Choose Language menu too Long when selecting Legacy languages

2017-09-02 Thread Srinivas K
I just installed DrRacket in Racket 6.10 in Manjaro Linux to work my way through SICP. When selecting a language through Choose Language if I click Other Languages the dialog box becomes too long to be accomadated in my monitor and so the Ok button disappears. Is it a bug with the GUI in