Re: 1.0.4 and 1.3.0 released

I am guessing that when you are using mod_python etc it is based on
using a Apache-1.3.xx version correct? I am guessing that for the
completely experimental.. one would take the 1.3 release, patch in 1.1
and then throw it on a apache 2.0.36 server..

On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 15:50, Hunter Matthews wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 17:37, Patrick Devine wrote:
> > 
> > Hey,
> > 
> > I've just been lurking on the list but I thought I should pipe up and say 
> > that I think that concentrating on scalability is definitely the way to 
> > go.  RHN has some real issues right now when it comes to scalability 
> > (although mostly on their database side), and I think it's important to 
> > get the rudimentary stuff nailed down first before trying to duplicate the 
> > sql/management parts.
> 
> Current may never scale to the extent that RHN does. They have half or a
> dozen people working full time, and Really Big Hardware.
> 
> However, if someone meant "Running Current locally for our x machines
> works better than our x machines hitting RHN" then possibly.
> 
> > 
> > I haven't started playing around with the 1.3 tree yet but I'm interested 
> > in what kind of performance increase there is between the 1.0 and 1.3.  Is 
> > anyone doing any kind of testing right now?  If I get a chance I'll see if 
> > I can put together some benchmark scripts..
> 
> 1.3.0 is "It works". We had to turn all the compression parts off due to
> (we believe) a header issue. We're still pumping the packages themselves
> with python, which is also something I think we can let apache do by
> itself, but it does work.
> 
> I don't know if its faster - I bet it as, as all the protocol
> setup/teardown is in apache C, instead of mostly python. Plus stunnel is
> out of the way.
> 
> The big advantage you'd likely see right now is that while each client
> may in fact be a little slower (compression turned off), you'll be able
> to scale to 20-40-?? simultaenous clients because apache can handle
> simultaneous hits - Current 1.0 can't and won't.
> 
> So for a single client benchmark, it might be a wash or against 1.3. 
> 
> Multiple _simultaneous_ clients, and 1.3 should wax 1.0 all over.
> 
> If you can run it, we'd love to hear from you. :)
> 
> Patches are even better...
> 
> 
>  
> -- 
> Hunter Matthews                          Unix / Network Administrator
> Office: BioScience 145/244               Duke Univ. Biology Department
> Key: F0F88438 / FFB5 34C0 B350 99A4 BB02  9779 A5DB 8B09 F0F8 8438
> Never take candy from strangers. Especially on the internet.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Current-server mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/current-server
> 
-- 
Stephen John Smoogen		[email protected]
Los Alamos National Laboratoy	CCN-2	PH: (505)-665-9408
Ta-03 SM-30  MailStop D445 DP 01U  Los Alamos, NM 87544