Edi Weitz edi@agharta.de writes:
Right. All you need now is a website with 400 visitors per second... :)
I totally agree with the position that bugfixes, interesting new features, and ease of use is the main priority.
On the other hand I glad to hear about this performance improvement. It is not only about 400 visitors per second, but also means less resource consumption and possibility to run web server on smaller machine, for example cheap VPN. Also, if we are serving pages with frames, images etc, even several visitors may produce many requests, and with performance improvement they will have better response time.
Several people mentioned that they were surprised by low hunchentoot performance: http://abstractstuff.livejournal.com/2007/06/28/ http://www.newartisans.com/blog_files/lisp.web.servers.php If you remember, I too tested hunchentoot by ApacheBench when running it in SBCL on a VPN with 64 MB of memory and SBCL was killed by linux because of out-of-memory.
But now, we see that simple fix significantly improve performance, that proves robust design of hunchentoot.
So it's good.
Sorry for the long letter.
Happy new year,
-- Anton