CGI load relative to Perl, etc. (last attempt, I promise)

[J. Landman Gay]

On 2/26/05 12:56 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:

> I hate to repost, but on the odd chance someone here might have some 
> info and could save me some testing time, this would be really helpful 
> to me and possibly others:
> 
> Does anyone know how using Rev as a CGI stacks up against Perl, Python,
> etc. in terms of server resource usage for equivalent tasks?
> 
> In brief, is Rev more efficient, less efficient, or roughly on par with 
> other scripting languages for CGI use?

I suspect no one has tested to find out. But the processes shouldn't 
take any longer than they do on an equivalent local machine. You can't 
fairly count the time it takes for the CGI to receive the request and 
return the results (that is, don't count the transit time.) So a small 
timing script that counts ticks from when the script starts till it ends 
and returns that along with the HTML data would probably be pretty easy 
to do.

The harder thing might be to get comparison data from an equivalent perl 
script.

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com