httpd-test-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkra...@ebuilt.com>
Subject Re: Pools, possible replacement, WAS: RE: [Fwd: brianp patch Quantify results]
Date Sat, 25 Aug 2001 07:00:21 GMT
> The t/htdocs/modules/include/*.shtml stuff is probably the best at the
> moment... if you can run those many, many times with a lot of concurrency,
> that'd probably get you somewhere.

Thanks.  I didn't even think of using httpd-test's perl-framework (I'm 
not really familiar with it).  I snarfed in that directory and pointed
flood at big.  Now, I think we're getting somewhere - the CPU is maxed
out.  Cool.

> Throw mod_ssl into the equation and you might get even closer to something
> testable, though it'd arguably be better if the load were pool-use-heavy.

Well, I think with all of the benchmarks flying around, it'd be nice to
agree that "URL X, followed by URL Y, followed by URL Z" is at least
a decent coverage of httpd-2.0 code.  At least for determining relative
merits of code A vs. code B that affects the entire server.  I dunno,
it's a thought.  Right now, everybody just uses ab and points at /
or some small static file.  I think it'd be nice to standardize this
somewhat.

FWIW, the default httpd.conf is awful.  mod_include isn't allowed by
default anywhere (even in the manual).  That needs to be fixed.  It
took me 30 minutes to get mod_include to serve a shtml file.  Drats.
-- justin


Mime
View raw message