>> From other experiences, I suspect that a pre-forking server would
>> perform quite a bit better, but of course with some caveats.
>>
>> I guess I should check out apache+mod_wsgi.
>>
>
> Yeah, definitely.
>
>
>> Do you have any feel for how it would compare to the numbers above?
>>
>
> It is likely much faster after the few initial requests.
>
Here are some show_timing numbers for my machine for a trivial
page calling Navigation macro:
sa threaded sa forking apache2-preforking+wsgi
Page.execute 0.009 0.126 0.009
getPageList 0.006 0.118 0.006
init 0.000 0.045 0.003
load_multi_cfg 0.000 0.030 0.000
run 0.165 0.668 0.151
send_page 0.159 0.659 0.145
send_page_content 0.013 0.129 0.013
total 0.168 0.714 0.154
So, after priming the apache2-preforking+wsgi option, it seems to be at
least competitive with standalone threading. However, it still may make
sense to add forking to the standalone in case functionality is needed
even if it is not that performant.
Note: unfortunately I only did the tests with mod_wsgi 2.3. I'll get around
to the testing v2.5.
Thanks,
John
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Moin-user mailing list
Moin-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/moin-user
