Re: very low performance

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 21:45:56 +0300, Тарасов Евгений <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> FastCgi is overkill for serving static images or static pages. It's not
>> for serving dynamic pages or images. \
> 
> And for what fastcgi is?

Handling dynamic requests.  Not doing the simplest thing the web server
itself does.

>> Here's what I'd try:
>> Profile the code or write to logs with timestamps
>> Change the code to return a string instead and see if the string takes
2
>> seconds. This will tell if it's the image or the > setup.
> 
> I've tested such application that outputs simple html directly from
string
> constant in programming language. This string should be in memory when
> program is working. But static html with similar content still 2 times
> faster than fastcgi program! I've tested it with ab. Although where is
no 2
> seconds, performance lost is evidently.

But you haven't profiled your program, so you don't actually know anything
about where it spends all that time.

A very, very brief Google search brought this link up:
http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Library/Streams#Speed .  I wonder if
you're using Handles, that sounds impressively inefficient.
-- 
 Matthew Weigel
 hacker
 unique & idempot . ent
_______________________________________________
FastCGI-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.pins.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/fastcgi-developers