on-rev example: 'globals.cgi' conversion
Mark Smith
lists at futilism.com
Sat Apr 18 15:44:41 EDT 2009
On 18 Apr 2009, at 20:24, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>>
>
> The CGI is indeed fast, but if the timing is being measured inside
> the script it's not accounting for the biggest difference between
> the CGI and on-Rev: on-Rev has no load time to bring the engine
> into memory and initialize it since it's already loaded and
> running, while the CGI engine has to be loaded fresh each time it's
> called.
>
> Even with that extra overhead the Rev CGI measures well against
> equivalent CGIs, but I'd be surprised if it could beat on-Rev.
>
> --
>
if you put this in a button you can see another test:
on mouseUp
put "http://marksmith.on-rev.com/mashash/hashmac.irev?
data=somedata&key=somekey&action=md5hmac" into tIrevUrl
put "http://marksmith.on-rev.com/cgi-bin/hashmac.cgi?
data=somedata&key=somekey&action=md5hmac" into tCgiUrl
put the millisecs into ts
put url tIrevUrl into tResA
put the millisecs - ts into tTimA
put the millisecs into ts
put url tCgiUrl into tResB
put the millisecs - ts into tTimB
put "irev:" & tTimA && tResA & cr & "cgi:" & tTimB && tResB
end mouseUp
I'm seeing the cgi taking 190-200 ms and the irev taking 170-180 ms.
The irev is 'including' a textified version of my hash/hmac library,
and the cgi is loading a stack which inserts the library (and a few
others) into back, so perhaps the test is slightly skewed in irev's
favour.
I'll leave it up for a few hours if anyone wants to try it out (I'd
also be interested in other people's timing from different places -
I'm in London).
Best,
Mark
More information about the use-livecode
mailing list