From: Zed Shaw <zedshaw@...>
Date: 2006-01-21T10:21:06+09:00
Subject: Re: [ANN] Mongrel 0.1.1 -- A Fast Ruby Web Server (It Works Now, Maybe)

That's sweet.  Didn't even think it would go that fast on Cygwin.   
Great news as this means there's an exit strategy for IIS and Win32  
people other than SCGI.  Now if I can just the win32 version of fork  
working I'd be gold.

One thing, could you do the same test against WEBrick using the  
examples/webrick_compare.rb script?  Just for my info.  You'll need  
to > /dev/null the output to make the test more fair.

Zed A. Shaw
http://www.zedshaw.com/


On Jan 20, 2006, at 12:14 PM, Sascha Ebach wrote:
>
> $ ./ab.exe -S -n 3000 http://localhost:3000/test
> Concurrency Level:      1
> Time taken for tests:   5.656250 seconds
> Complete requests:      3000
> Failed requests:        0
> Write errors:           0
> Total transferred:      156000 bytes
> HTML transferred:       21000 bytes
> Requests per second:    530.39 [#/sec] (mean)
> Time per request:       1.885 [ms] (mean)
> Time per request:       1.885 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent  
> requests)
> Transfer rate:          26.87 [Kbytes/sec] received
>
> WOW, that is really something for Cygwin (Ruby/Cygwin is _really_  
> slow). It would be nice if there were at least a WEBrick benchmark  
> included, so one could make a direct comparison. If you could get  
> Mongrel to be at least half as fast as lighttpd that would be  
> really something. Than it would be an alternative for production.
>
> -Sascha
>