Kurt, this is exactly my point. I just wanted to show that removing
the mutex on slow actions would obviously make the application way
faster. The benchmark numbers aren't important.
What's important to see is that when the mutex is on it's applied to
your action and not only the DB transactions, here is the action I
tested:
def index
sleep(0.1)
Test.first.text
end
(Test beind a DM model with a text attribute)
I hope my intentions are clearer now.
-Matt
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Kurt Schrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you add in 0.1 seconds of sleep time inside a mutex then you've
> rate-limited yourself to a maximum of 10 requests a second, as each request
> can't process until the previous one is finished. (1/.1 = 10)
>
> This is not a good benchmark.
>
> -Kurt
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Matt Aimonetti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:57:47
> To: <[email protected]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [merb] Merb mutex lock
>
>
>
> After John Bressnik from SDRuby asked questions about Merb mutex, I
> run some benchmarks.
>
> I was hitting a controller making 1 simple DB request and I couldn't
> see a difference between the mutex lock being on or off.
>
> I then added a sleep of 0.1 in the controller are here are the dramatic
> results:
>
> http://gist.github.com/11201
>
> Requests per second: 9.81 [#/sec] (mean) with mutex on VS Requests
> per second: 83.26 [#/sec] (mean) mutex off
>
> The benchmark app was using DM.
>
> -Matt
>
>
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"merb" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/merb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
