<Flamebait> For some really high performance sites, compiled C is the way to go. It's faster and as long as you remove all compilers from the machines in question, it's also more secure. </flamebait> Having said that, I will also add that the downside is that in order to keep pace with your competitors who are writing code in Perl, PHP, and Python, it is going to cost you some serious dollars. You have to have deep pockets and in house coders to make it worth looking at, which normally limits this kind of thing to the Fortune 100.
For the entire rest of the planet, perl is a perfectly good solution. IMHO, Jimi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Perrin Harkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Thomas Eibner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Jeff Yoak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:32 PM Subject: Re: mod_perl vs. C for high performance Apache modules > > So I'm trying to show that mod_perl doesn't suck, and that it is, in fact, > > a reasonable choice. Though within these limits it is still reasonable to > > point out the development cycle, emotionally it is the least compelling > > form of argument, because the investor has a hard time removing from > > consideration that given our particular situation, there was a very fast > > solution in using his C-based routines. > > Well, that is the primary reason for using Perl over C, and you really have > to count maintenance and the relative likelihood of C-ish bugs like buffer > overflows as part of it. > > Well-coded C should be faster than Perl, but Perl is fast enough for nearly > any web-based application. If this guy saw CPU spikes, he probably had > something else wrong, like running out of memory. > > You might find this article aboout C and Perl performance useful: > http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2001/06/27/ctoperl.html > > - Perrin >
