Hi Anselm,
I checked the performance of revision
22b5b3cfa6b28f8e0c6c35c04ad9b4cb609b5643 like this:
echo 'foo bar' > index.html
doas quark > /dev/null &
ab -n 10000 -c 20 '
http://localhost:8083/'
And I got 942 requests/second, so I'd say there is no significant
difference to the current version of quark.
Kind regards,
Richard
Anselm Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2019 at 11:34, <maillists.rulmer_AT_mailbox.org> wrote:
> > I'm toying with quark and noticed it's comparatively poor performance in
> > my use case. I used Apache bench to benchmark the web server. With this
> > setup I got 980 requests/second:
>
> Out of curiosity, can you do me a favour and check a very old revision like
>
> 22b5b3cfa6b28f8e0c6c35c04ad9b4cb609b5643
>
> instead. This one was fork() based and kind of the state I know of
> quark. Seems that quark has accumulated a lot of cruft since then...
>
> I'd be curios what performance pattern you see with that.
>
> I leave it to the current maintainer to assess your finding.
>
> Best regards,
> Anselm
Received on Mon Sep 23 2019 - 21:50:03 CEST