[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: nginx
Subject: Re: Nginx benchmark result share ^^
From: Phillip Oldham <phill () activityhq ! com>
Date: 2009-10-29 10:11:28
Message-ID: 4AE96A50.9050608 () activityhq ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Kiswono Prayogo wrote:
> this benchmark show that v8cgi and php quite the same except php
> faster on string concatenation (because javascript using ambigous "+"
> operator), and v8cgi faster on variable indexing (or so i guess
> because v8 developer said so..)
Interesting. Since the common way to do string concattenation in JS is
by joining arrays, I wonder what sort of performance each has doing long
array collapsing.
> ############### WEB SERVER + COMPRESSION + INTERPRETER
>
> and the benchmark using web servers, i don't know if it's fair
> configuration:
Maybe it would be better to follow the nginx guide to setting up
PHP-FastCGI and running the benchmarks again (essentially PHP against
V8CGI rather than Apache+PHP vs. Nginx+V8CGI).
> ############### my spawn fcgi configration (1024 child):
>
> V8C_SCRIPT="/usr/bin/spawn-fcgi -a 127.0.0.1 -p 9000 -u www-data -g
> www-data -F 1024 `which v8cgi` $ESP_SCRIPT"
Again, an Nginx + PHP-FastCGI vs. Nginx + V8CGI test means you can use
the same number of child processes, so the comparison will be more fair.
--
*Phillip B Oldham*
ActivityHQ
phill@activityhq.com <mailto:phill@theactivitypeople.co.uk>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Policies*
This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the above named
recipient(s) only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in
error, please reply to this e-mail and highlight the error. No action
should be taken regarding content, nor must you copy or show them to anyone.
This e-mail has been created in the knowledge that Internet e-mail is
not a 100% secure communications medium, and we have taken steps to
ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus. We must
advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should
ensure they are completely virus free, and that you understand and
observe the lack of security when e-mailing us.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Attachment #3 (text/html)]
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Kiswono Prayogo wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:99024f5f0910282340j548ef2d5ld8f945ad59599f56@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><font class="Apple-style-span"
face="'courier new', monospace">this benchmark show that v8cgi and php
quite the same except php faster on string concatenation (because
javascript using ambigous "+" operator), and v8cgi faster on variable
indexing (or so i guess because v8 developer said so..)<br>
</font></blockquote>
Interesting. Since the common way to do string concattenation in JS is
by joining arrays, I wonder what sort of performance each has doing
long array collapsing.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:99024f5f0910282340j548ef2d5ld8f945ad59599f56@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><font class="Apple-style-span"
face="'courier new', monospace">############### WEB SERVER +
COMPRESSION + INTERPRETER<br>
<br>
and the benchmark using web servers, i don't know if it's fair
configuration:<br>
</font></blockquote>
Maybe it would be better to follow the nginx guide to setting up
PHP-FastCGI and running the benchmarks again (essentially PHP against
V8CGI rather than Apache+PHP vs. Nginx+V8CGI).<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:99024f5f0910282340j548ef2d5ld8f945ad59599f56@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><font class="Apple-style-span"
face="'courier new', monospace">############### my spawn fcgi
configration (1024 child):<br>
<br>
V8C_SCRIPT="/usr/bin/spawn-fcgi -a 127.0.0.1 -p 9000 -u www-data -g
www-data -F 1024 `which v8cgi` $ESP_SCRIPT"<br>
</font></blockquote>
Again, an Nginx + PHP-FastCGI vs. Nginx + V8CGI test means you can use
the same number of child processes, so the comparison will be more fair.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<div
style="font-family: sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; \
font-weight: normal; font-size: 12px; line-height: 1.1; font-size-adjust: none; \
font-stretch: normal; width: 300px; color: rgb(51, 51, 51);"> <p><strong>Phillip B \
Oldham</strong><br> ActivityHQ<br>
<a href="mailto:phill@theactivitypeople.co.uk">phill@activityhq.com</a></p>
<hr size="1">
<p style="font-size: 90%;"><strong>Policies</strong></p>
<p style="font-size: 90%;">This e-mail and its attachments are intended
for the above named recipient(s) only and may be confidential. If they
have come to you in error, please reply to this e-mail and highlight
the error. No action should be taken regarding content, nor must you
copy or show them to anyone.</p>
<p style="font-size: 90%;">This e-mail has been created in the
knowledge that Internet e-mail is not a 100% secure communications
medium, and we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and
attachments are free from any virus. We must advise that in keeping
with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are
completely virus free, and that you understand and observe the lack of
security when e-mailing us.</p>
<hr size="1">
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic