Re: Fwd: [speedycgi] Speedycgi scales better than mod_perl withscriptsthat contain un-shared memory

[Ask Bjoern Hansen]

On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Sam Horrocks wrote:

>  > Folks, your discussion is not short of wrong statements that can be easily
>  > proved, but I don't find it useful.
> 
>  I don't follow.  Are you saying that my conclusions are wrong, but
>  you don't want to bother explaining why?
>  
>  Would you agree with the following statement?
> 
>     Under apache-1, speedycgi scales better than mod_perl with
>     scripts that contain un-shared memory 

Maybe; but for one thing the feature set seems to be very different
as others have pointed out. Secondly then the test that was
originally quoted didn't have much to do with reality and showed
that whoever made it didn't have much experience with setting up
real-world high traffic systems with mod_perl.


  - ask

-- 
ask bjoern hansen - <http://ask.netcetera.dk/>
more than 70M impressions per day, <http://valueclick.com>