Re: [Chicken-users] Spiffy Webserver
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 01:52:04AM -0500, Jeremy Cowgar wrote: > Anyone have some example sites run w/Spiffy? How robust is Spiffy? I have a > site that is currently handling ~ 2.5 million hits/mo, or on average 51 a > second. It's currently backed by MySQL and is using almost no cache due to > poor design (not totally my fault). > > The only thing Spiffy would be responsible for is the dynamic, non-cachable > items, which should be minimal. I know it's silly, but I do not have hard > numbers on what that would be, but guessing it would probably be down to > about 10% of the requests, 222k/mo, or 5 per minute on average (which is a > bad way to figure because we get 90% of activity during 11am-12pm EST. > > Is Spiffy up to something like this? I'm not aware of any large sites currently running Spiffy. I run Spiffy on my home server which serves up a phoghorn-powered photo gallery and my (currently empty) homepage. It also runs my cousin's website (with ~0 hits per month :P ) through a vhost setup. Spiffy is the only webserver on this computer. (ie, no proxying through Apache or anything) Obviously this is a very simple setup which doesn't need to serve a lot of requests, but at least I can say it is quite robust. When I first started using Spiffy (about 2 years ago?) I experienced several random unexplained crashes, but I haven't had a crash this year yet. I think this crash might have been caused by a bug in Chicken itself which has been fixed by now. (nothing had changed in Spiffy, but I had upgraded Chicken when the crashes disappeared) So I can't definitely recommend Spiffy based on hard numbers. However, my gut feeling says it's capable of serving up what you describe. It would be interesting to see how well it holds up on a bigger server. If you do decide to try it out, please report your findings back to the list (or me). If there are any performance issues, I'd be happy to help you out in getting bottlenecks out of the way. Regards, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth pgpodmpsmlaNL.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Spiffy Webserver
Quoting Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > So I can't definitely recommend Spiffy based on hard numbers. However, my > gut feeling says it's capable of serving up what you describe. It would be > interesting to see how well it holds up on a bigger server. If you do > decide to try it out, please report your findings back to the list (or me). > If there are any performance issues, I'd be happy to help you out in > getting bottlenecks out of the way. Are there any functioning example site applications available for download anywhere? Jeremy ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Spiffy Webserver
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 11:41:41AM -0500, Jeremy Cowgar wrote: > Quoting Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > So I can't definitely recommend Spiffy based on hard numbers. However, my > > gut feeling says it's capable of serving up what you describe. It would be > > interesting to see how well it holds up on a bigger server. If you do > > decide to try it out, please report your findings back to the list (or me). > > If there are any performance issues, I'd be happy to help you out in > > getting bottlenecks out of the way. > > Are there any functioning example site applications available for download > anywhere? What kind of thing are you looking for? I could put some example stuff on the wiki. Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth pgpsn92se3EI3.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Spiffy Webserver
On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 11:41:41AM -0500, Jeremy Cowgar wrote: > Quoting Peter Bex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > So I can't definitely recommend Spiffy based on hard numbers. However, my > > gut feeling says it's capable of serving up what you describe. It would be > > interesting to see how well it holds up on a bigger server. If you do > > decide to try it out, please report your findings back to the list (or me). > > If there are any performance issues, I'd be happy to help you out in > > getting bottlenecks out of the way. > > Are there any functioning example site applications available for download > anywhere? By the way, you can check out the documentation pages for phoghorn and spiffy-utils, which contain complete examples of SXML pages you can just drop in a directory on your server and have Spiffy serve up. http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/eggs/spiffy-utils http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/eggs/phoghorn The example pages should be surrounded with tags. Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth pgpSKxKiG8cyb.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
Re: [Chicken-users] Spiffy Webserver
Hello Jeremy, On Sat, 23 Dec 2006 01:52:04 -0500 Jeremy Cowgar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyone have some example sites run w/Spiffy? How robust is Spiffy? I have a > site that is currently handling ~ 2.5 million hits/mo, or on average 51 a > second. It's currently backed by MySQL and is using almost no cache due to > poor design (not totally my fault). > > It's a long story, but the current code base is of almost no value and I am > contemplating a rewrite. First and foremost with caching at the front line. > I am thinking of putting something like Spiffy behind Lighttpd and using > mod_cml, so that the cache system achieves near static html performance. > > The only thing Spiffy would be responsible for is the dynamic, non-cachable > items, which should be minimal. I know it's silly, but I do not have hard > numbers on what that would be, but guessing it would probably be down to > about 10% of the requests, 222k/mo, or 5 per minute on average (which is a > bad way to figure because we get 90% of activity during 11am-12pm EST. > > Is Spiffy up to something like this? Maybe you can simulate a real-world load using a benchmark tool, so you can get an idea about how Spiffy would react in such a situation. Httperf (http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/linux/httperf/) is a good tool for benchmarking web-servers. Best wishes, Mario ___ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
