Re: bug in svn version

Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> Why edit every class definition (and there are a lot in Spyce!) when 
> you could just add the __metaclass__ line?

That's a news for me... and yes it work, thanks!

>> You can find them here (ok this are in Italian language, but there
>>  are only numbers... If you want I can translate it )
>> 
>> http://tinyurl.com/fxrss http://tinyurl.com/e8ll2
> 
> Well, nobody *wants* to be slow, but here if I'm reading this right 
> that just means you had ~100 req/s with Spyce vs ~1000/s with PHP, 
> for instance.

Yes and no, because on my Athlon(tm) XP 2600+, with "fork" I have:

Requests per second:    6.83 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       7319.638 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       146.393 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          55.95 [Kbytes/sec] received

Ok, the 6 req/sec isn't a bad result, but also isn't a good result...
On a double Xeon 3GHz, always with "fork", I have:

Requests per second:    17.36 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       2880.157 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       57.603 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          142.18 [Kbytes/sec] received

Another time, I can't believe that these are a good results for a server
that has 2 Xeon cpu, 2 GB RAM and a SCSI disk!

> 100/s means 8.6 million per day, so for a "real" page, Spyce isn't 
> the bottleneck; your code is.
> 

100/s no, but 6.83/s yes!
But my question was *why* fork are so slow then thread (119.58 vs 6.83)?

> -Jonathan


Bye,
Michele


-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642