simonhf

3 ms·

1.
by simonhf 16y ago
Sounds good. How many lines of code do you think the password check test would be in node.js? If it's not too long then could you imagine doing the node.js version?
2.
by simonhf 16y ago
Hmmm... I'm confused because my node.js+net script also doesn't call setEncoding() and looks the same as your node.js+net script. The node.js+net+crcr script of yours is a nice optimization though on my test box it reaches 23,224 queries pe
3.
by simonhf 16y ago
silentbicycle, I like your idea. I wonder if it will be considered 'enough' by those who poopooed the "Hello World" benchmark? On a dual core or better box and assuming the bcrypt server replies immediately, I would predict that performance
4.
by simonhf 16y ago
silentbicycle, thanks, I updated the name as suggested. So do you have any ideas for a more interesting benchmark program? Ideally it should be something which needs to keep state as you suggest and makes use of some kind of simple business
5.
by simonhf 16y ago
mrb, thanks for the optimized version of the 'node.js+net' script. But what is difference with the original script? I copy and pasted your script and the queries per second result remains unchanged... so where does the 47% faster come from?
6.
by simonhf 16y ago
mrb, please note that the connections per second and queries per second are handled individually in the benchmark. So the connect handler should make no difference to the queries per second.
7.
by simonhf 16y ago
mrb, thanks for the optimized node.js code. I re-ran the benchmark and the queries per second increased to 23,224 queries per second... so I agree with the 30% faster but not your queries per second estimate (which math did you do? ~ 18k *