On 11/16/06, Carl Franks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> It shows that in one circumstance, > Catalyst is sadly slow. Let's fix that. Matt has just pointed out that Cat's optimised for large applications with lots of paths, and for flexible programming. Only fix it if that doesn't compromise this, which is more important than looking good in one flawed benchmark.
My original intent was to prod someone that is knowledgable enough of Catalyst's internals to criticize this benchmark's methods to create a benchmark that is more friendly to Catalyst's strengths. We've established that serving static content is not a fitting use. We've established that a single action is also not an approptiate use of Catalyst's dispatcher. So we include some content directly in the response body. But how many actions must be present for the dispatcher to shine? Then we modify the test to use a more realistic number and excercise the dispatcher a bit. This may not make Catalyst run any faster, but it should allow it show it's strengths and is by no means clipping the wings of the other benchmark participants. -- Cory 'G' Watson http://www.onemogin.com _______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
