[Cherokee] Benchmarks of cherokee vs nginx

[Tony Zakula]

I am not complaining about OpenVZ.  I deploy servers on a regular
basis using OpenVZ.  I also deploy using KVM, and others.  There is a
massive difference between OpenVZ and KVM in implementation, system
stability, etc.  They are entirely different animals.  You cannot
discount the hypervisor.  The hypervisor can make or break your
application depending on how you're application is structured.  For
instance, Java apps run great on KVM hypervisors, but really poor if
at all on OpenVZ unless you tune the OpenVZ instance to meet your Java
apps needs.  The reason for that is the way Java handles memory.
Threads is another big issue hypervisors. To say that the hypervisor
has no effect on application performance is not accurate at all.

Tony


On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Cliff Wells <cliff at develix.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 01:02 +1200, Ryan B wrote:
>> I'm guessing any form of vps setup's would have issues with
>> benchmarking.. I was hardly going to run this on my home connection or
>> pay for a uber dedi.
>
> Actually, it's a fine benchmark so long as both HTTP servers are running
> in the same environment.  Can you extrapolate and draw conclusions about
> how they might run on different hardware or in a different environment?
> Maybe with a grain of salt, but that's the case with any benchmark, so
> complaining about OpenVZ tuning is pointless.
>
> Putting it on dedicated hardware isn't terribly useful either, since
> fewer people do that now. Even dedicated servers are virtualized for
> management reasons.
>
> The only issue I'd have is if the node has other VE's on it that you
> don't have control over since those could clearly affect the outcome.
> Still I'd expect deviations to show from multiple runs that would reveal
> that type of issue.
>
> Cliff
>
>
>