Hi Bill, thanks for your reply. ------Original Message------ From: Bill Anderson <bill@libc.org> To: Firestar <theebh@mail.com> Sent: July 6, 2000 8:19:39 AM GMT Subject: Re: [Zope] Is Zope slow?
Define slow. Slow compared to what? Doing what?
That's a ig difference between Zope and Apache and AOLServer. they don't _do_ the stuff that Zope does.
Apache does little other than serve stati files, and take output from cgis (or modules, same _basic_ concept). Zope actually does the work. For some things Zope is appropriate, and where it is, it outperforms (IME) Apache. For others, like serving static content, it is slowER than apache.
of course, slow is all relative. I have a couple zope Servers cranking out ~80 requests per second. Is that slow? ;)
That's ~6 Million requests/day. Cut it in half, for more complicated tasks, and still moving along at a good clip. What's better, try Apache doing the same things.
Does your next project invlove more than just static files sitting on a hard drive? Chances are, you'll be better off with Zope....
I have been programming with PHP and PERL, and they are quite fast, even when serving dynamic pages. Of course, they do not provide all the features of Zope, but they are able to handle things like sessions, authentication, database API...which is quite adequate for most small-to-medium websites. (although sometimes it's quite frustrating putting the modules together:)
Speed and Bencmarks are irrelevant when it comes to real-world performance. :)
benchmark may not be accurate, but i still think that speed is still impt. Check out Jakob Nielsen's website and you would know that speed of serving webpages is one of the main usability factors. But then again, if Zope really is THAT good, i may be inclined to switch over and use it as my main development tool in future; but the speed factor is still worrying me - i wouldn't want my website to 'crawl' when i'm presenting it to my boss or clients:) regards, thee ______________________________________________ FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com Sign up at http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
Firestar wrote:
I have been programming with PHP and PERL, and they are quite fast, even when serving dynamic pages. Of course, they do not provide all the features of Zope, but they are able to handle things like sessions, authentication, database API...which is quite adequate for most small-to-medium websites. (although sometimes it's quite frustrating putting the modules together:)
Yes, Zope is slower than Apache but so is a bus compared to a porsche. However, you can do things with buses that would take forever with a sports car, and some that are impossible (moving furniture ;) If you want the best of both worlds, map out the images and large static files from apache's config to go to itself and forward the rest over PCGI to Zope (read up on mod_rewrite). This way, the dynamic stuff is served by zope and the static stuff is handled by apache, both doing what they are good at. You can add LocalFS to Zope to allow administration of the static files too. This is what PHP does, that is just a module which handles php files, everything else is handled by Apache. PHP itself isn't that fast (it doesn't even cache compiled code). A decent 500Mhz PIII will knock out about 80 pages per second under Zope (~40 for complex things) but given that many sites where speed is important are very graphical, the ratio of a zope hit to an apache one is reasonable - on the site I'm working on this is about 1:10 and current traffic (not yet under Zope) is 18Million hits per month. If ever you run out of power (or reach the halfway point) you can start thinking of adding some caching or migrate to ZEO. In fact, if that happens, you'd be stupid not to have some sort of cluster - you'd have a very busy site! Phill
Firestar wrote:
Hi Bill, thanks for your reply.
[...]
That's ~6 Million requests/day. Cut it in half, for more complicated tasks, and still moving along at a good clip. What's better, try Apache doing the same things.
Does your next project invlove more than just static files sitting on a hard drive? Chances are, you'll be better off with Zope....
I have been programming with PHP and PERL, and they are quite fast,
PHP != Apache Perl != Apache These are add-ons. If you look at the benchmarks you referenced, those were _static_ files being tested. even when serving dynamic pages. Of course, they do not provide all the features of Zope, but they are able to handle things like sessions, authentication, database API...which is quite adequate for most small-to-medium websites. (although sometimes it's quite frustrating putting the modules together:)
Speed and Bencmarks are irrelevant when it comes to real-world performance. :)
benchmark may not be accurate, but i still think that speed is still impt. Check out Jakob Nielsen's website and you would know that speed of serving webpages is one of the main usability factors.
Believe me, I know all about _performance_ of websites. :)
But then again, if Zope really is THAT good, i may be inclined to switch over and use it as my main development tool in future; but the speed factor is still worrying me - i wouldn't want my website to 'crawl' when i'm presenting it to my boss or clients:)
Have you checked out some real-world sites that run zope? Is being able to do 6+million requests/day on commodity hardware 'crawling'? Take it easy.... Bill -- "Linux: the operating system with a CLUE... Command Line User Environment". seen in a posting on comp.software.testing
participants (3)
-
Bill Anderson -
Firestar -
Phill Hugo