Eric-
On Feb 16, 2009, at 3:39 PM, Eric Wong wrote:
Ezra Zygmuntowicz <[email protected]> wrote:
This is really cool. I'm going to play with this now and see how it
works.
Hi Ezra, any news on your testing?
I've barely had a chance to work with it myself (I started writing
this
email about 5 hours ago and got interrupted/distracted :x).
From informal benchmarks on a purely CPU/memory-bound Sinatra app,
when
simultaneous connections are less than nr_workers, Unicorn wins
slightly; however when there are more workers then the async I/O
buffering that Mongrel can do wins slightly over Unicorn.
Of course the app I tested with is atypical in that it:
1) is completely thread-safe including all libraries used
2) has no external dependencies outside of the machine it runs on
3) has very uniform response times for all actions
Unicorn is of course designed for apps:
1) with non-thread-safe dependencies
2) that depend on (occasionally unreliable) external API calls
3) where some actions taking measurably longer than others
Tests were run on a fairly unsaturated GigE LAN.
mailman/listinfo/mongrel-development
Seems to work as advertised so far, cool stuff ;) One suggestion,
folks are pretty standardized on rack and config.ru files these days.
I'd much rather see unicorn look for a APP_ROOT/config.ru to load as
its config file rather then the eval that returns a hash style it uses
now.
Nice work.
Cheers-
Ezra Zygmuntowicz
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Mongrel-development mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-development
