Hi, On 2006/08/27, at 09:30, Kaare Rasmussen wrote:
>> Axkit2 looks like it'll be a lovely candidate for a production- >> quality >> scalable standalone server, although it's a single-process affair >> with >> optional forking so we'll need to figure out how to manage that >> appropriately to maximise performance. > > Do you (or anyone else) know any benchmark or measurement about ax2 > performance? Speed, resource usage compared to similar Apache2/ > modperl2 > installations. Even partial or biased (though better than "I can > ctrl-c it, > so it's good"). > Can it compete with Apache for speed, and in what circumstances? > Would be nice > to know. I don't. But for me at least, what I'm looking for is a simpler HTTPD to power my back-end's with Catalyst apps. Even if ax2 is a little bit slower than Apache, it would be a good choice in some situations. > Why do you think it's scalable? Anything in the architecture? And > where do I > find any documentation about the architecture? The one on cpan.org > isn't > exactly complete. Well, it uses Danga::Socket and IO::AIO as the building blocks of the network core, and those two have proven that they scale pretty well... See Perlball and DJabberd (the last one had a test scenario with 300k connection if memory serves me right). > Too me it makes more sense to divide the front end (the light > process) from > the back end (worker processes) to make it easy to distribute to > different > servers, but it's another discussion. To me also. I'm targetting ax2 as an possible replacement for Apache +mod_perl in the backend. Best regards, -- Pedro Melo JID: xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ List: Catalyst@lists.rawmode.org Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.rawmode.org/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/