[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- mod_specweb99.c 31 Oct 2002 19:39:04 - 1.16
+++ mod_specweb99.c 14 Jan 2003 15:02:00 - 1.17
@@ -765,8 +765,9 @@
line = apr_psprintf(r-pool, %10d\n, 0);
- if (apr_file_write_full(f, line, strlen(line), NULL) != APR_SUCCESS) {
-
Brian Pane wrote:
Do you have any profile data that shows where the bottlenecks are?
No, sorry. At the moment I'm focusing on mod_specweb99.
From recent tests with other workloads, I anticipate that the most
expensive operations are likely to be: reading the HTTP headers,
Greg Ames wrote:
But I can mention that my very unofficial mini-SPECweb99 runs with the client
and server both on my ThinkPad with 100% standard dynamic GETs* show that
prefork is the fastest, worker is about 1% slower, and leader is about another
1.5% slower. This is a noticeable improvement
Brian Pane wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
gregames2002/06/03 11:05:50
Modified:specweb99/specweb99-2.0 mod_specweb99.c
BTW, does anyone have SPECweb results for 2.0 that they're
able to discuss?
Not that can be published according to the SPEC rules, or are worth
