From dev-return-11142-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Tue Feb 24 05:11:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 20444 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2004 05:11:38 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Feb 2004 05:11:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 807 invoked by uid 500); 24 Feb 2004 05:11:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 773 invoked by uid 500); 24 Feb 2004 05:11:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 760 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2004 05:11:16 -0000 Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 00:11:23 -0500 (EST) From: Cliff Woolley X-X-Sender: jcw5q@cobra.cs.Virginia.EDU To: Scott Lamb cc: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: Compile-time vs. run-time checks In-Reply-To: <496DCFBE-667F-11D8-861D-000A95891440@slamb.org> Message-ID: References: <29963BD9-6637-11D8-861D-000A95891440@slamb.org> <20040223114301.B14031@lyra.org> <496DCFBE-667F-11D8-861D-000A95891440@slamb.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Scott Lamb wrote: > significant difference between them. In transferring either big or > small files with httpd-2.0 HEAD and ab over loopback on Darwin > (keepalive on). Which I'd think would be the ideal situation for seeing > an improvement... Neither ab nor loopback make for a particularly good test of this sort of thing. I suggest you use flood instead of ab and use two machines instead of the loopback adapter. --Cliff