Re: highscalability.com report

On 4/4/2012 1:41 PM, Fred Moyer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:37 AM, demerphq <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 4 April 2012 09:31, William A. Rowe Jr. <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> When was the last time you built perl with no threading support?  It's
>>> certainly a 5%-15% win.
>>
>> Not certainly. We did that and saw almost no difference.
> 
> I've done two perlbench sets of comparisons with threaded/non-threaded
> across a couple different versions of perl. I don't have the results
> posted on the web anymore, but non-threaded was up to 20% faster for
> some operations.
> 
> As far as real world differences go, I don't think you are likely to
> see differences with mod_perl in production environments with threaded
> vs non-threaded.  That 20% increase probably only affects 1% of your
> application.

Right.  The missing detail/point was that a well-tuned pool of single
threaded PHP, or Perl, or assembly coded worker processes running under
fcgid is going to outperform the in-process model, given finite cpu and
memory resources.