You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to modperl@perl.apache.org by Vlad Safronov <vl...@comptek.ru> on 2000/02/16 11:14:12 UTC
Performance: EmbPerl/Mason vs. ePerl (what's faster?)
Hi!
Which (EmbPerl/Mason/Perl) you think is faster? EmbPerl/Mason or ePerl?
I know that EmbPerl/Mason/Apache::ASP is more
suitable for generatying dynamic HTML pages, but
I only want to know how does they slow down the
performance comare to pure Perl/ePerl?
--
Best regards,
******************************************************
Vlad A. Safronov vlads@comptek.ru
Re: Performance: EmbPerl/Mason vs. ePerl (what's faster?)
Posted by Joshua Chamas <jo...@chamas.com>.
Vlad Safronov wrote:
>
> I thought ePerl is more pure Perl than EmbPerl/Mason because
> its simple features. ePerl is just a Perl script with <% %>,
> no html specific features, no special syntax, etc ..
> I thought it was easy to implement and it's fast as Perl.
>
I think by default ePerl is just html with perl inserted
via <: :>, on the other hand Apache::ASP may be what you
are looking for with perl inserted via <% %> :) ... but
you are right, one of the lures for me with ASP was the
natural way HTML & code are interleaved.
-- Joshua
_________________________________________________________________
Joshua Chamas Chamas Enterprises Inc.
NodeWorks >> free web link monitoring Huntington Beach, CA USA
http://www.nodeworks.com 1-714-625-4051
Re: Performance: EmbPerl/Mason vs. ePerl (what's faster?)
Posted by Vlad Safronov <vl...@comptek.ru>.
I thought ePerl is more pure Perl than EmbPerl/Mason because
its simple features. ePerl is just a Perl script with <% %>,
no html specific features, no special syntax, etc ..
I thought it was easy to implement and it's fast as Perl.
Joshua Chamas wrote:
>
> Vlad Safronov wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > Which (EmbPerl/Mason/Perl) you think is faster? EmbPerl/Mason or ePerl?
> > I know that EmbPerl/Mason/Apache::ASP is more
> > suitable for generatying dynamic HTML pages, but
> > I only want to know how does they slow down the
> > performance comare to pure Perl/ePerl?
> >
>
> What makes you think the ePerl is any more pure than
> EmbPerl/Mason/Apache::ASP ??? The most pure perl form
> of mod_perl script is the raw mod_perl handler. I just
> did the first HelloWorld ePerl benchmark, and its
> the same speed as Mason, and slower than the others.
>
> Check out the results at:
> http://www.chamas.com/bench/hello_bysystem.html#group19
>
> Note that I would have benched ePerl on WinNT, but it
> only builds on Unix. :(
>
> -- Joshua
> _________________________________________________________________
> Joshua Chamas Chamas Enterprises Inc.
> NodeWorks >> free web link monitoring Huntington Beach, CA USA
> http://www.nodeworks.com 1-714-625-4051
--
Best regards,
******************************************************
Vlad A. Safronov vlads@comptek.ru
Re: Performance: EmbPerl/Mason vs. ePerl (what's faster?)
Posted by Joshua Chamas <jo...@chamas.com>.
Vlad Safronov wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Which (EmbPerl/Mason/Perl) you think is faster? EmbPerl/Mason or ePerl?
> I know that EmbPerl/Mason/Apache::ASP is more
> suitable for generatying dynamic HTML pages, but
> I only want to know how does they slow down the
> performance comare to pure Perl/ePerl?
>
What makes you think the ePerl is any more pure than
EmbPerl/Mason/Apache::ASP ??? The most pure perl form
of mod_perl script is the raw mod_perl handler. I just
did the first HelloWorld ePerl benchmark, and its
the same speed as Mason, and slower than the others.
Check out the results at:
http://www.chamas.com/bench/hello_bysystem.html#group19
Note that I would have benched ePerl on WinNT, but it
only builds on Unix. :(
-- Joshua
_________________________________________________________________
Joshua Chamas Chamas Enterprises Inc.
NodeWorks >> free web link monitoring Huntington Beach, CA USA
http://www.nodeworks.com 1-714-625-4051