From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri Jul 9 0:30: 7 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC1F914DB5 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 00:30:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dcs@newsguy.com) Received: from newsguy.com by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN) id QAA24888; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 16:29:46 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <37859F1F.3CDAB53A@newsguy.com> Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 16:05:03 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: pt-BR,ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ask Bjoern Hansen Cc: Seth , Donald Wilde , Bill Fumerola , freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Benchmarking web apps on Apache References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote: > > tOn Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Seth wrote: > > ... > > mod_perl handler stuff). The "crucial" tests (dynamic content via cgi's) > > showed the other OS to edge out our beloved FreeBSD. > > Nah, get real. If you're concerned about performance, cgi will be your > last option. Err... Since cgi are widely used, you might want to consider that many people consider *CGI PERFOMANCE* to be very important. It's not a question of how to extract most performance out of it, but how much performance the system will give to what you actually have to serve. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org Given infinite time, 100 monkeys could type out the complete works of Shakespeare. Win 98 source code? Eight monkeys, five minutes. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message