Template Toolkit is what I am familiar with and while I don't have any numbers, I would think the caching that it provides for you would win out over processing the page every request. Once the page has been created, it shouldn't need any more processing until it is changed.
Look at Apache::Template and Template Mason provides caching also. Ben -----Original Message----- From: grant stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 5:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: figures/resources on content via apache SSI vs. database-driven (perl DBI) all- Perhaps I am making a mistaken assumption, but just in case I wanted to support my assumptions with some real data. Can anyone point me to some script resources, or maybe just the results of their own experience on the performance of SSIs in apache vs. converting a site to a database-driven scenario. My assumption is, of course, that if the requirements are simple, go with the simplest solution. Basically, I broke the site up into includes executed via SSI. My question would be, is there any drastic improvement (CPU, memory, download time, server processes, whatever) that would be gained by switching to some kind of mod_perl templating system? These are all static pages. I think all I'm asking about is a performance comparison for a site comprised of 95% static content between Apache SSI and a mod_perl db/template system. thanks- grant stevens http://l-eet.com PS. RTFM answers are fine as long as the particular FM is specified. :)
