I've written high-traffic sites for my employer. TT hasn't really been a bottleneck for us. In my opinion, the most important thing is that stuff scale in a linear fashion, and that's usually easy to achive with Catalyst.
Marcus On 11/16/06, Nilson Santos Figueiredo Junior <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/16/06, Matt S Trout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Besides which, I've never yet seen a production application (and between > Shadowcat's client portfolio I've seen not a small number thereof) where the > dispatch overhead was even statistically significant to the overall > performance - the bottleneck has always been either data retrieval or template > rendering. This makes me wonder if these high traffic Catalyst sites are using TT or another templating solution. If they are using TT, it should be very helpful if someone published a sort of TT performance guide. Or at least a bulleted list with things not to do because I'm probably doing them all, given the current (lack of) speed from my applications without that much traffic. Any complex (or just plain big) page will take around 3-4 seconds to render with 90% of that time being spent with TT. The best work around was to use one of the caching plugins where I could, but users still have to experience crappy load times whenever something is updated on the database. Thankfully, it's an internal system - so it's not *that* critical. -Nilson Santos F. Jr. _______________________________________________ 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/
-- With regards Marcus Ramberg _______________________________________________ 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/
