Re: Fwd: [speedycgi] Speedycgi scales better than mod_perl withscripts that contain un-shared memory

[Joshua Chamas]

Sam Horrocks wrote:
> 
>  Don't agree.  You're equating the model with the implemntation.
>  Unix processes model concurrency, but when it comes down to it, if you
>  don't have more CPU's than processes, you can only simulate concurrency.
> 

Hey Sam, nice module.  I just installed your SpeedyCGI for a good 'ol
HelloWorld benchmark & it was a snap, well done.  I'd like to add to the 
numbers below that a fair benchmark would be between mod_proxy in front 
of a mod_perl server and mod_speedycgi, as it would be a similar memory 
saving model ( this is how we often scale mod_perl )... both models would
end up forwarding back to a smaller set of persistent perl interpreters.

However, I did not do such a benchmark, so SpeedyCGI looses out a
bit for the extra layer it has to do :(   This is based on the 
suite at http://www.chamas.com/bench/hello.tar.gz, but I have not
included the speedy test in that yet.

 -- Josh

Test Name                      Test File  Hits/sec   Total Hits Total Time sec/Hits   
Bytes/Hit  
------------                   ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- 
---------- 
Apache::Registry v2.01 CGI.pm  hello.cgi   451.9     27128 hits 60.03 sec  0.002213   
216 bytes  
Speedy CGI                     hello.cgi   375.2     22518 hits 60.02 sec  0.002665   
216 bytes  

Apache Server Header Tokens
---------------------------
(Unix)
Apache/1.3.14
OpenSSL/0.9.6
PHP/4.0.3pl1
mod_perl/1.24
mod_ssl/2.7.1