Adam Michaels wrote:
> I was introduced to cherokee last year but couldn't give it much
> attention due to the lack of FastCGI support. Now that FastCGI and
> SCGI support is being put in I've decided to agressively test
> cherokee. As someone who serves over 3 billion page views per year,
> webserver performance is extremely important and you can't really
> get faster than cherokee.
It sounds like a huge site. I'm glad to hear that. :-)
> I read a previous mailinglist thread about initial FastCGI
> performance for a simple PHP file at 2000 req/s. That is quite
> impressive. Is this due to Cherokee buffering connections before
> forwarding to FastCGI?
The fcgi handler uses all the common mechanisms and classes of the
server so it is inheriting most of the previous goodies.
> Also, does Cherokee use persistent connections to FastCGI?
Well, I haven't explained it yet. Actually, Cherokee 0.5.0 [1] will
include two FastCGI handlers:
- fcgi: This is the default FastCGI handler. It does not support
persistent connections, basically because of all the problems we
had trying to make it work with PHP. It is quite fast even if it
opens a socket per request.
- fastcgi: This one implements the *complete* FastCGI protocol.
This one does support persistent connections AND multiplexed
requests. This handler should be the default one, but due to bad
FastCGI protocol implementation of PHP I had to implement the
previous one.
> I can't seem to figure out how to get cherokee compiled from
> svn. There is no compile script in the trunk. Once I can get it
> working I look forward to testing.
Try to run ./autogen.sh, that should be enough. (It depends on
automake > 1.8, autoconf and libtool).
1.- You can expect it to be released today or tomorrow.
--
Greetings, alo.
http://www.alobbs.com
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.0x50.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee
