[Dancer-users] Starman vs Plack::Handler::Apache2 my results

sawyer x xsawyerx at gmail.com
Fri Sep 14 07:55:29 CEST 2012

Starman has some performance benchmarking
here<https://metacpan.org/module/Starman#PERFORMANCE>but they don't
include Apache.
I guess it also matters what extensions you have on Apache and how well
it's configured.
I am surprised it gets you better performance than Starman...

It would be interesting to raise this on irc.perl.org's #plack and see what
they think.

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:59 AM, David C gurugeek <1 at 1.ai> wrote:

> Hello again,
> I am running this page
> http://dancer.1.ai using
> plackup -E deployment -s Starman --workers=10 -p 5001 -a ./bin/app.pl >
> and this page
> http://elephant.1.ai/perl using Plack::Handler::Apache2
> in my tests Plack::Handler::Apache2 seems to be faster. Shouldn't it be
> the other way around ?
> I did try both with curl  + safari and chrome benchmarks and even
> http://whichloadsfaster.com :)
> Thanks for your comments
> Regards
> David
> _______________________________________________
> Dancer-users mailing list
> Dancer-users at perldancer.org
> http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.backup-manager.org/pipermail/dancer-users/attachments/20120914/f56ccbe2/attachment.htm>

More information about the Dancer-users mailing list