Do Rev CGI Suffer Performance HIts?

[Richard Gaskin]

Dan Shafer wrote:
> On another thread, jbv (JB) wrote about using Rev as a CGI engine on  
> Linux as a matter of regular course.
> 
> I'm curious. I've been laying out a design for an INternet-based app  
> and figuring I'd have to use Python (which is OK because I love it  but 
> in some ways it may be overkill for this project) because of my  
> understanding that a Rev CGI can't handle even modest volumes of  
> traffic. This is apparently because a separate instance of the CGI is  
> launched for each HTTP request received.
> 
> True or myth? 

It's true on all non-Mac servers (Macs can use Apple events), but how is 
this different from Perl or Python?

I know that in recent years there's an option in Apache to keep Perl 
resident in memory, but behaviorally it still acts as a separate instance.

If there isn't commonly the same sort of option for Python, then my 
hunch is that the resource demand would be measured by a combination of 
engine size (load time) and engine efficiency, and may not differ 
dramatically from the Rev engine.  Jacque recalls Scott Raney once 
noting that when called as a CGI, the "faceless" engine does a lot less 
work at startup and loads almost instantaneously, even faster than a 
scriptless standalone.

Do I misunderstand something about CGI and/or Python?

Anyone have any hard comparison data about relative efficiencies between 
Rev and Python?

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Media Corporation
  __________________________________________________
  Rev tools and more: http://www.fourthworld.com/rev