in reply to Re: Can your site handle this?
in thread Can your site handle this?
Oh come on stress testing against Localhost is entirely unrealistic. For a start you've removed all network I/O limitations, and for seconds unless your renting a beefy server your likely to have far more available RAM on a home system, especially these days.
You mention swapping, and your quite right, the moment your server starts grinding in virtual memory it's game over.
Any large scale site these days runs on servers with dozens or hundreds of processors and many gigabytes or even terabytes of ram.
When your running out of ram it doesn't matter how clever your algorithm is and how efficient it is, it's still going to grind to a horrible slow halt when the memory is maxed out.
That's why I argue that memory usage is far more important these days in building scalable solutions than processing power is, where the same was not true just a few years ago when most of the solutions we have available (the ones which people religiously worship as being beyond question the only solutions worth using) were written.
I read somewhere, and I'm sorry I can't remember where to give citation, that HTTP::Engine, uses 15mb of ram per child process to do what it does, and that probably made perfect sense in 2006... It's designed for machines where memory usage was less important than processor speed, and that's why when the hardware changes specification new solutions are needed.
That in itself is proof of the validity of reinventing wheels when needed, because the road itself has changed.
Perhaps in the future CPU speed increases will falter whilst memory chip density will accelerate, then the situation shifts again, but in the meantime, unless you have a big-iron server budget your server is far more likely to run at peak efficiency using software which uses more processor power but only consumes 2mb of ram per child process rather than 15mb of ram per child process and leaves the CPU idling for most of its cycles.
This is also a generic argument for the comeback of dynamic languages in general, since they are always more processor intensive than their fully pre-compiled counterparts, a fact that simply doesn't matter here in late 2011.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^3: Can your site handle this?
by cavac (Prior) on Nov 06, 2011 at 01:06 UTC | |
by Anonymous Monk on Nov 06, 2011 at 01:53 UTC | |
by cavac (Prior) on Nov 06, 2011 at 02:39 UTC | |
by Anonymous Monk on Nov 06, 2011 at 03:38 UTC | |
by cavac (Prior) on Nov 06, 2011 at 04:05 UTC | |
|