On 3 Dec 2000, Greg Stark wrote:
> Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
> > > Lately I've been getting very interested in using solid-state disks
> > > for high-performance issues. They're expensive, but if you need that
> > > much speed, they'
Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
> > Lately I've been getting very interested in using solid-state disks
> > for high-performance issues. They're expensive, but if you need that
> > much speed, they're worth it.
>
> Are they? I tried one once,
Perrin Harkins wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
> > Lately I've been getting very interested in using solid-state disks
> > for high-performance issues. They're expensive, but if you need that
> > much speed, they're worth it.
>
> Are they? I tried one once, and it wasn't any
On 3 Nov 2000, David Hodgkinson wrote:
> > In my tests, a modern version of mod_proxy (serving from cache) was faster
> > than Squid on Linux.
>
> Really? Cool. What about taking memory usage into account?
Well, Squid is kind of a memory hog and mod_proxy has been extremely light
and well-behav
Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 3 Nov 2000, David Hodgkinson wrote:
> > Dare I add that Squid has plenty of low-latency cacheing features you
> > could use?
>
> In my tests, a modern version of mod_proxy (serving from cache) was faster
> than Squid on Linux.
Really? Cool. What
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Vivek Khera wrote:
> Lately I've been getting very interested in using solid-state disks
> for high-performance issues. They're expensive, but if you need that
> much speed, they're worth it.
Are they? I tried one once, and it wasn't any faster than my normal disk
because I
On 3 Nov 2000, David Hodgkinson wrote:
> Dare I add that Squid has plenty of low-latency cacheing features you
> could use?
In my tests, a modern version of mod_proxy (serving from cache) was faster
than Squid on Linux.
- Perrin
> "MS" == Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MS> doing it this way. If you're that concerned about perhaps the weight of
MS> Apache + mod_perl, consider trying TUX or thttpd, or something else
MS> lightweight written in C.
Lately I've been getting very interested in using solid-state
Hi all,
> At 09:46 AM 11/3/00 +, Nigel Hamilton wrote:
> >I would like to write this mini-server in perl ... but maybe a threaded
> >programming language is better?
> >I'm contracting for an Ad Serving company and we were mooting the idea of
> >writing our own lean and mean web server for ser
Other than some of the caching other people talked about (eg squid)...You
might also take a look at mod_mmap to hold the ads in shared memory among
the Apache processes and still use mod_perl for the logic of which ad to serve.
Later,
Gunther
At 09:46 AM 11/3/00 +, Nigel Hamilton wrote
Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> egads, don't do it... Web servers are well developed for this kind of
> thing, and modern filesystems (e.g. ext2fs) will buffer the ads in RAM
> anyway if you have enough. You're not likely to get any speed increase
> doing it this way. If you're that c
On Fri, 3 Nov 2000, Nigel Hamilton wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm contracting for an Ad Serving company and we were mooting the idea of
> writing our own lean and mean web server for serving the Ads.
>
> We would like to hold all the Ads in memory (each Ad is less than 20K).
>
> The next thing is to cre
Hi,
I'm contracting for an Ad Serving company and we were mooting the idea of
writing our own lean and mean web server for serving the Ads.
We would like to hold all the Ads in memory (each Ad is less than 20K).
The next thing is to create a pool of mod_perl-esque processes that will
handle the
13 matches
Mail list logo
