The below link shows the benchmark between different web servers ( apache,
Conclusion of Above Benchmarks
*It seems that Cherokee continues being the faster among the
web**servers. According to this benchmark, Cherokee is, for instance,
79% **faster than Apache, and 18% faster than nginx.*
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Johan De Meersman <vegivamp@stripped>wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Brent Clark <brentgclarklist@stripped
> > On 11/03/2010 16:52, Krishna Chandra Prajapati wrote:
> >> Hi Brent
> >> You can visit the below link.
> > Well thats disappointing.
> > sigh
> > So what are we supposed to use for loadbalancing mysql.
> Throw plenty of servers at it :-) If you put three servers behind the
> you'll get the same performance as a single server, every additional server
> is performance benefit :-D
> Seriously, though, I don't have much faith in these kind of things (in the
> context of read/write splitting, that is), because the proxy can never know
> wether there'll be a write-request in the session without notification from
> the client anyways. If you have to modify your application anyway, just do
> it toroughly (you have to fish out the connects that will write in either
> case, so that's half the work done) and make your application fully
> slave-aware. That also allows you to tighten security by assigning a
> select-only user for the read connections, diminishing the chances of a
> succesfull sql injection.
> If you're wondering about loadbalancing between read-only slaves, you don't
> need a SQL aware proxy, just balance at level 4 using ldirectord or a
> hardware loadbalancer with sticky sessions.
> Bier met grenadyn
> Is als mosterd by den wyn
> Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel
> Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel