Re: [ANN] Turbo.lua v1.0-beta1
- From: John Abrahamsen <jhnabrhmsn@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 21:43:36 +0100
I can do that. However I'm planning to do a much wider benchmark session
soon, with more frameworks... The results on the site is only meant as
pointers and not really scientific evidence :).
2013/11/15 Sébastien Volle <sebastien.volle@xxxxxxxxx>
> Congratulations, Turbo sounds fantastic. About the benchmarks, could you
> provide a little more details about the versions used? I reckon that would
> be LuaJIT 2.0, PyPy 2.1 and Node 0.10.x. But the three runtimes presented
> are under heavy development and their performance characteristics are
> likely to evolve quite a bit in the future, so it would be nice to have a
> point of reference in time.
>
> -- seb
>
>
> 2013/10/29 Petite Abeille <petite.abeille@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>>
>> On Oct 29, 2013, at 2:48 PM, John Abrahamsen <jhnabrhmsn@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Petite Abeille: The expiry dates are so long because the static file
>> > handler is setting them to a incredible amount of time for things that
>> will
>> > never change (pictures etc.). The amount is the same amount that the
>> > Varnish reverse proxy uses in its code.
>>
>> (All good and fine. But this is invalid as far as HTTP 1.1 goes. Years
>> are 4 digits only in an HTTP-date such as 'Expires'. And that's that.)
>>
>> In any case, nicely done nonetheless :)
>>
>>
>>
>
--
Best regards/Vennlig hilsen
John Abrahamsen
Mobile: (+47) 945 40 425
Other related posts:
