On Tuesday 19 December 2006 08:24, Jim Fulton wrote: > Here is what I'd like to see. I'd like to see someone get more involved > in the WSGI effort. A very specific thing I think is needed is a WSGI > server benchmark that can be used to evaluate different WSGI servers for > both functionality and performance. This would benefit us and other > projects. We should use this to evaluate different WSGI servers > to see which ones best meet our needs. This would guide our decision > whether to continue to try to support any of our existing server > and might spur server developers to greater efforts and server > improvements. I don't think this is a huge effort and certainly not a > technically challenging one. I think that a modest effort that tested some > obvious things like speed of requests with large and small inputs and > outputs, with varying levels of concurrency, measuring speed and resource > consumption would probably spur contributions from others in the Python Web > community. > I would do this myself if I didn't have a number of other projects that > I'm currently focused on.
I agree with your assessment. It is extremely difficult to figure out which WSGI server fulfills Zope's criteria. In fact, I would suspect that only ZServer (Zope 2 and 3 version) does, because noone else has such strong requirements. I would love to see such a profiling tool too, not only for testing servers, but applications as well. But I am also involved in too many other projects. Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student) Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3firstname.lastname@example.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com