> The t/htdocs/modules/include/*.shtml stuff is probably the best at the > moment... if you can run those many, many times with a lot of concurrency, > that'd probably get you somewhere.
Thanks. I didn't even think of using httpd-test's perl-framework (I'm not really familiar with it). I snarfed in that directory and pointed flood at big. Now, I think we're getting somewhere - the CPU is maxed out. Cool. > Throw mod_ssl into the equation and you might get even closer to something > testable, though it'd arguably be better if the load were pool-use-heavy. Well, I think with all of the benchmarks flying around, it'd be nice to agree that "URL X, followed by URL Y, followed by URL Z" is at least a decent coverage of httpd-2.0 code. At least for determining relative merits of code A vs. code B that affects the entire server. I dunno, it's a thought. Right now, everybody just uses ab and points at / or some small static file. I think it'd be nice to standardize this somewhat. FWIW, the default httpd.conf is awful. mod_include isn't allowed by default anywhere (even in the manual). That needs to be fixed. It took me 30 minutes to get mod_include to serve a shtml file. Drats. -- justin
