Apache Server runs console command faster than terminal

2016-05-11 Thread abhi.k.singh
second when i host it using Apache. The same command takes 10 seconds if i run my script on SimpleCGI Server of python. So, I can deduce that my apache is much faster. But i am not able to understand why it is faster than the terminal itself. Can someone tell me what happens when a script tries to run

Re: Is RMS faster than JMS?

2011-11-23 Thread James Strachan
On 23 November 2011 14:02, KingAndrew wrote: > Thanks for the input.  The whole question comes from my clients that have > used corba/rmi for 15 years.  Now that we are switching to > Camel/ActiveMQ/JMS they all say: >  "It might scale better but I don't see how it can be as fast as Corba/RMI" Ma

Re: Is RMS faster than JMS?

2011-11-23 Thread KingAndrew
via Camel] < ml-node+s465427n501612...@n5.nabble.com> wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Faster is a tricky term. > > You can say that runner A is faster than runner B, when you have them both > run the same distance. In 100m A might be faster than B, but B might have > more stamina and ma

Re: Is RMS faster than JMS?

2011-11-23 Thread James Strachan
If you can use asynchronous messaging, then messaging is typically much faster (especially when you start to use transaction batching) as you're not sat blocking waiting on RPC calls. e.g. on the consumer side, the message broker will asynchronously stream messages into your process spa

Re: Is RMS faster than JMS?

2011-11-23 Thread Ioannis Canellos
Hi Andrew, Faster is a tricky term. You can say that runner A is faster than runner B, when you have them both run the same distance. In 100m A might be faster than B, but B might have more stamina and manage to get first in a longer distance say 300m. In your question I can see runner RMI and

Is RMS faster than JMS?

2011-11-22 Thread KingAndrew
Hi All, I have a client that has an RMI/Corba/IIOP SOA application. For scaleablity I plan on them using Camel/ActiveMQ. Scaling is good but it must be as performant as the current RMI implementations. So my question is: Is RMI inherently faster than JMS? I was thinking that since we won&#

Re: Faster!!

2009-07-10 Thread Claus Ibsen
This discussion about IN, OUT, FAULT is moved to the topic we current have on the dev forum. This topic should be used for performance talk. On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Claus Ibsen wrote: > On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote: >> I hardly see a reason for the IN message to

Re: Faster!!

2009-07-09 Thread Claus Ibsen
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote: > I hardly see a reason for the IN message to be mutable.  Shouldn't it be > read-only to start with? > In my mind the IN is what you've been told, it's history, cannot be changed. >  If you want to echo something slightly different, you can al

Re: Faster!!

2009-07-09 Thread Hadrian Zbarcea
I hardly see a reason for the IN message to be mutable. Shouldn't it be read-only to start with? In my mind the IN is what you've been told, it's history, cannot be changed. If you want to echo something slightly different, you can always produce the OUT you want (modified copy of the IN).

Re: Faster!!

2009-07-09 Thread James Strachan
2009/7/9 Claus Ibsen : > Hi > > See this wiki page for ideas on performance optimizations > http://camel.apache.org/camel-2x-speed-optimizations.html Copying Messages seems to be the big cost (particularly all those headers etc). I wonder if we should use in the Pipeline a ReadOnlyMessageFacade w

Re: Faster!!

2009-07-09 Thread Claus Ibsen
they will take several forms, but all > are small. I parse a single line of text (eg from a log file or a text > formatted socket), turn it into a small POJO, let esper work some magic on > it, and I spit out correlation events probably in XML. > -- > View this message in co

Re: Faster!!

2009-06-28 Thread bwtaylor
ation events probably in XML. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Faster%21%21-tp24198880p24247565.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Faster!!

2009-06-25 Thread Claus Ibsen
way JMS and MINA routing with high speed would be on the radar as high priority components to be as fast as possible. BTW: The payloads you need yo send in real life with kind are they? Eg small message, medium sized message, or big messages? Are they byte[], stream based, text based or Objects? A

Re: Faster!!

2009-06-25 Thread Hadrian Zbarcea
r time, especially when you look at high throughput components like esper and mina. I'll also see if I can hook up a profiler and see if I can provide some vision on what the bottlenecks I see are. If 1078 lands in a snapshot I can try it out to and report back. -- View this message in

Re: Faster!!

2009-06-25 Thread bwtaylor
vision on what the bottlenecks I see are. If 1078 lands in a snapshot I can try it out to and report back. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Faster%21%21-tp24198880p24208422.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Faster!!

2009-06-25 Thread Claus Ibsen
benchmarks, and publish the numbers every release. On the > prominent benchmarks, I'd love to see every release of Camel having a ticket > or two addressing the top bottlenecks. Surely I'm not the only user out > there interested in seeing a Camel get Faster. > -- > View this m

Faster!!

2009-06-25 Thread bwtaylor
benchmarks, I'd love to see every release of Camel having a ticket or two addressing the top bottlenecks. Surely I'm not the only user out there interested in seeing a Camel get Faster. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Faster%21%21-tp24198880p24198880.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.