[Cherokee] benchmarks

[Xan]

En/na A.D.F. ha escrit:
> Xan wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I found
>> http://www.rkblog.rk.edu.pl/w/p/cherokee-and-lighttpdf-django-scgi-benchmark/
>>
>> comparing lighttpd and cherokee (I think the two best web servers).
> 
> Argh !
> By definition lighttpd and cherokee can't be compared fairly
> because the first has a version of 1.4.16 (and soon 1.5.0)
> whereas the second has not reached version 0.6.0 yet.

Yes, I understand that perhaps cherokee could be more slower than 
ligttpd, but be honest if we don't prove it, we cant' say it ;-). I hear 
that 0.6 is very faster than 0.5 so maybe it's more faster than lightpd (?)

> 
> I expect that cherokee is somewhat slower than lighttpd
> when there are many parallel connections
> (it depends a lot on which OS you are running them,
>  which OS system calls are available, i.e. poll, epoll, kqueue,
>  sendfile, etc.).
> 
> Anyway I guess that an "almost" fair comparison could be performed
> by using the same poll method, number of file descriptors
> and number of threads / processes, etc., i.e.:
> 
> #
> # Cherokee
> #
> server!max_fds = 1024
> server!thread_number = 5
> server!poll_method = "poll"
> 
> #
> # Lighttpd
> #
> server.max-fds = 1024
> server.max-worker = 5
> server.event-handler = "poll"
> 
> 
>> Can you compare it with official benchmarks? I'm refering to update
>> benchmarks in official web page.
> 
> Right now, official benchmarks don't specify test conditions,
> so they should be redone in the right way;
> anyway any serious benchmark
> (done / repeated for each possibile combination of above main settings)
> is time expensive because it should be performed on many OS
> (i.e. FreeBSD, NetBSD, Linux 2.4, Linux 2.6, Sun Solaris, etc.) too.
> 
> Alvaro could say something more on this.
> 

For starting, a work could be done in Solaris. I hear that alvaro has a 
job in Sun and perhaps Sun and cherokee could see "what fast cherokee 
could be". It could be a promotion for cherokee and Sun.

>> I think a good server has to provide good benchmarks
> 
> Maybe should provide ... :-), Apache does not provide
> official benchmarks.

Yes, and I think they are wrong: by now Apache drops the number of hosts 
that use it. The numerical evidences are the best. And the benchmarks 
could show us how best is a server (a part of other characteristics like 
features)

> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Why don't you ask people who made benchmarks that included Cherokee
> to repeat them with latest versions and to post an email
> on Cherokee mailing lists ?
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 	http://sys3.es/migue/DEC/Trabajo/

Perhaps a link into cherokee web page could be a good starting. Links to 
  benchmarks between cherokee and other web servers

thanks,
Xan.

> 
> 
> NOTE: the latest developed version can always be found here:
> 
> 	http://www.cherokee-project.com/download/trunk/
>