Hi Kihaguru, Oh, well, didn't see anybody asking, so... why are you guys still using a CGI if so much processing power is required?
Basically anything will perform better nowadays, so unless the code is really complicated, you're looking for a solution at the wrong place. Em 27/07/2020 14:52, Jordan Geoghegan escreveu: > > > On 2020-07-24 03:16, Kihaguru Gathura wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Which of the following legacy CPU types is best suited for very busy web >> server httpd+slowcgi >> >> Niagara CPU Such as T2 - More parallel Threads and Low power per single >> thread >> Sparc64 CPU such as VI, VII - Fewer threads but more computing power per >> thread. >> >> How is multithreading utilization of httpd+slowcgi like? >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Kihaguru. > > Hi Kihaguru, > > As with any computer, newer tends to be better with Moore's Law and all > that. On sparc64 most of the logical cores that are shown are really > just SMT pretending to be a bunch of cores. I have one machine that > claims 128 cores, but in reality, its just 16 cores with 8-way SMT. > sparc64 isn't renowned for its single core execution speed, so the > faster the better in that regard. > > In my experience with running OpenBSD on sparc64, the kernel biglock or > crypto became a bottleneck before other things did. (I've used T3 and T4 > machines fairly extensively with OpenBSD). I've found that disk > activity, networking and/or TLS would bottleneck before httpd became a > bottleneck when I was running sparc64 web servers in production. If you > are running very heavy scripts/programs with slowcgi, then you're > results may be different. > > Things have likely improved dramatically in the past year or two with > all the work done on removing the biglock, but the moral of the story > remains, fewer, faster cores are likely to produce superior performance > to numerous low power cores. > > Regards, > > Jordan >
