This supports posts done via XML-RPC. Multi-categories have been added as well.

Posting some perl code.

[code syntax="Perl"]
use Text::Textile;

my $tex = Text::Textile->new();
my $htm=$tex->process('*zomg*');
print $htm."\n";
[/code]

and some C code

[code syntax="CPP"]

#include

int main(void) {
printf("hello world!\n");
return 0;
}

[/code]

Some CSS

[code syntax="CSS"]
.code {
border: 1px solid;
min-height: 60px;
background-color: #eae7de;
}

.code .key1 {
color: #0000FF;
}

.code .key2 {
color: #0000FF;
}

.code .string {
color: #14a042;
}
[/code]

Some HTML

[code syntax="HTML"]

hello world

[/code]

Some SQL code

[code syntax="SQL"]
select * from people where IQ > 100;
[/code]

And here is me quoting some text.

At the moment whenever I read the news I am angry at the newspapers and the government for scaremongering, wasting my tax dollars^Wpounds on stupid ideas and not generally not being reasonable.

As you can see, syntax highlight has been added to this blog. Supports a plethora of languages thanks to Text::Highlight.

I hope you had a good halloween. This is a test post.

Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off

Today I began working on a new project and decided to benchmark Catalyst and Rails for fun. See how my new favorable framework does against Rails. I was a bit shocked at the results though. I guess this is worth mentioning in hope Catalyst can improve in it's Accessor Generation code. So here are the results:

Benchmark System
Celeron 1.8Ghz
1 Gig of Ram
FreeBSD-6

Interpreters:
Ruby - 1.8.5
Perl - 5.8.8

Frameworks:
Catalyst - 5.7003
Rails - 1.1.6

Run as:
Lighttpd: 1.4.13
FCGI: 3 max proc

Benchmarked as:
ab -n 1000 -c 100 http://siteurl.com/

h3. Some background

I specifically turned off sessions and did not use ActiveRecord/DBIC to keep it as fair as possible between the two frameworks. Both frameworks were run under Lighttpd and FCGI. I tried to keep this as apples to apples as possible.

So lets take a look at the results!

Rails:

Server Software:        lighttpd/1.4.13                                    
Server Hostname:        wansanity.com
Server Port:            9090

Document Path:          /main/index
Document Length:        2142 bytes

Concurrency Level:      100
Time taken for tests:   18.261 seconds
Complete requests:      1000
Failed requests:        0
Broken pipe errors:     0
Total transferred:      2296892 bytes
HTML transferred:       2143288 bytes
Requests per second:    54.76 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       1826.10 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       18.26 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          125.78 [Kbytes/sec] received

Connnection Times (ms)
            min  mean[+/-sd] median   max
Connect:       74   885 1742.9    138 11785
Processing:   172   661 1216.8    173  8195
Waiting:       84   661 1216.8    173  8194
Total:        172  1547 2123.8    330 11893

Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50%    330
66%   1354
75%   2786
80%   3106
90%   4297
95%   6279
98%   8216
99%   9285
100%  11893 (last request)

Thats 54 connections / sec which is great. I have seen it peak at 70 connections/sec which is just awesome!

Catalyst:

	
Server Software:        lighttpd/1.4.13                                    
Server Hostname:        wansanity.com
Server Port:            80

Document Path:          /
Document Length:        2232 bytes

Concurrency Level:      100
Time taken for tests:   43.503 seconds
Complete requests:      1000
Failed requests:        0
Broken pipe errors:     0
Total transferred:      2401300 bytes
HTML transferred:       2238490 bytes
Requests per second:    22.99 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       4350.30 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       43.50 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          55.20 [Kbytes/sec] received

Connnection Times (ms)
              min  mean[+/-sd] median   max
Connect:       75   322  808.5     93  6028
Processing:   269  3804  851.8   3928  6754
Waiting:      192  3804  851.7   3928  6754
Total:        269  4126 1178.5   4186 10293

Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
  50%   4186
  66%   4384
  75%   4404
  80%   4424
  90%   5025
  95%   6422
  98%   7194
  99%   7709
 100%  10293 (last request)
	

22 connections / sec not exactly what I expected from a framework built on top of the fast Perl Interpreter.

Being a bit disappointed with the results, I investigated further.

So here are the perl dprof results.

	
%Time ExclSec CumulS #Calls sec/call Csec/c  Name
 0.00   0.605  4.128   1512   0.0004 0.0027  NEXT::AUTOLOAD
 0.00   0.373  0.373  25794   0.0000 0.0000  Class::Accessor::Fast::__ANON__
 0.00   0.235  0.235   1177   0.0002 0.0002  NEXT::ELSEWHERE::ancestors
 0.00   0.211  0.225      1   0.2107 0.2253  YAML::Type::code::BEGIN
 0.00   0.184  5.182     86   0.0021 0.0603  Catalyst::Engine::HTTP::_handler
 0.00   0.177  0.205   2583   0.0001 0.0001  File::Spec::Unix::canonpath
 0.00   0.164  0.309   1942   0.0001 0.0002  File::Spec::Unix::catdir
 0.00   0.156  2.408   3201   0.0000 0.0008  Catalyst::Action::__ANON__
 0.00   0.134  0.739     73   0.0018 0.0101  base::import
 0.00   0.129  0.136   5904   0.0000 0.0000  Class::Data::Inheritable::__ANON__
 0.00   0.109  0.814      7   0.0155 0.1163  main::BEGIN
 0.00   0.108  0.108   1323   0.0001 0.0001  HTTP::Headers::_header
 0.00   0.101  0.116     10   0.0101 0.0116  Template::Parser::BEGIN
 0.00   0.101  0.334     11   0.0092 0.0304  Catalyst::Engine::BEGIN
 0.00   0.101  0.295   1264   0.0001 0.0002  Path::Class::Dir::stringify
	

It seems like the main bottleneck in Catalyst 5.7003 is Next. Jrockway was kind enough to post some new code into Catalyst's trunk for me to try; a new replacement for Next - C3.

Here are the results with the C3 Plugin from Trunk

	
%Time ExclSec CumulS #Calls sec/call Csec/c  Name
 0.00   0.211  0.233      1   0.2106 0.2330  YAML::Type::code::BEGIN
 0.00   0.135  0.135   8035   0.0000 0.0000  Class::Accessor::Fast::__ANON__
 0.00   0.126  0.721     73   0.0017 0.0099  base::import
 0.00   0.109  0.116     10   0.0109 0.0116  Template::Parser::BEGIN
 0.00   0.108  0.805      7   0.0155 0.1150  main::BEGIN
 0.00   0.093  0.106      7   0.0133 0.0152  Catalyst::Engine::HTTP::Restarter:
                                             :Watcher::BEGIN
 0.00   0.090  0.105   1023   0.0001 0.0001  File::Spec::Unix::canonpath
 0.00   0.085  0.326     11   0.0077 0.0296  Catalyst::Engine::BEGIN
 0.00   0.081  0.905    196   0.0004 0.0046  Catalyst::execute
 0.00   0.069  0.120      8   0.0087 0.0150  Catalyst::Plugin::Server::XMLRPC::
                                             Request::BEGIN
 0.00   0.064  1.639    444   0.0001 0.0037  next::method
 0.00   0.061  0.313     32   0.0019 0.0098  Catalyst::BEGIN
 0.00   0.054  0.216      7   0.0077 0.0309  Template::Config::load
 0.00   0.054  0.189      4   0.0135 0.0473  HTTP::Body::OctetStream::BEGIN
 0.00   0.054  0.388      4   0.0135 0.0970  Gambit::BEGIN	
	

So there you have it, the results with the C3 Plugin. It only made a slight difference by pushing the Catalyst benchmark score to 25 connections / sec.

I hope this benchmark can get some changes put into place for Catalyst's next release.

Conclusion

It seems like Rails is roughly 62% faster than Catalyst at this time. Keep in mind this benchmark does not take into account the ORM performance. This benchmark tests how quick the frameworks themselves dispatch methods and render views.

Also take into consideration when choosing a framework you need to look at the problem at hand. Catalyst can feed off Perl's vast CPAN resource library. Catalyst has features that Rails does not have. Catalyst's DBIC ORM supports multi-column primary keys and can do relationship mapping just by reading the schema! You don't even have to bother writing any has_many belongs_to definitions!

I am going to have to take a look into Django see how well it fairs in this benchmark. Perhaps an update on this?

Update Django Results

Server Software:        lighttpd/1.4.13                                    
Server Hostname:        fab40
Server Port:            9090

Document Path:          /
Document Length:        2235 bytes

Concurrency Level:      100
Time taken for tests:   13.643 seconds
Complete requests:      1000
Failed requests:        0
Broken pipe errors:     0
Total transferred:      2409769 bytes
HTML transferred:       2253459 bytes
Requests per second:    73.30 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       1364.30 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       13.64 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          176.63 [Kbytes/sec] received

Connnection Times (ms)
              min  mean[+/-sd] median   max
Connect:       76   483 1068.1    101  8666
Processing:   190   744  726.3    571  6088
Waiting:       93   744  726.4    572  6088
Total:        190  1227 1414.2    692  9606

Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
  50%    692
  66%    972
  75%   1209
  80%   1445
  90%   3282
  95%   4020
  98%   6414
  99%   8113
 100%   9606 (last request)

72 connections / sec! Amazing and the winner!

And anyone that disagrees with this can go ahead and look at the code for all three projects.

I have the least experience with django for your information

mst Please don't kill me'

Many thanks go out to jrockway to helping me point out the root cause of the bottleneck in Catalyst.

well, hopefully this release will go smoother. I forgot to remove specific tidbits from testing that got included in 0.03. This should be a more polished release.

Fixed:
IE render width issue.
Removed all traces of lets get dugg.

New Features:
Template support.
Site title configurable in YAML

Typeface-0.4.tbz2

Parallel's new coherence feature in action.

Pretty amazing stuff if you ask me.

This is a simple video tour of photoshop CS3. The first thing that struck me about CS3 is the artwork or lack of. The icons and the About menu lack graphic polish. Did someone get fired in the artistic department? Well this is a beta, so lets move on.

The first thing that you will notice that is drastically changed in photoshop CS3 is the palette menu. It is one single column now. Concerning the palette menu, I can't tell if anything is missing, since I don't use photoshop throughly like some graphic designers do. Next what I noticed is the "Save for Web" menu has been changed for "Save for Web & Device." It seems like Adobe is providing the utilities for graphic designers to target embedded devices such as PDAs and cell phones.

Lastly, what struck me is the new way of handling the right hand palettes. It seems they can be docked and folded out. Also it seems like Adobe presented 3 new viewing modes for OS X photoshop; maximized screen mode, full screen mode, and standard screen mode. Fairly cool features, however, I think I will stick with the default standard screen mode.

This was a bit rushed, so the overview is very brief and I neglected covering Adobe Bridge. However, this does give you a casual glance at what has been changed in CS3.

Just a note, Bridge is still as slow as ever!

Yes, you can try out CS3 without a serial key for 30 days 2 days!

I found this fairly entertaining, definitely worth my 4 minutes of life. For those who don't know Kabayashi is the Japanese gentleman who beats us lard ass Americans at our own game; glutting. This does deliver.

Just wanted to wish everyone a happy new year. A new Typeface release is imminent. The new revision has a vastly snappier Dojo backend due to optimization. The Typeface release will include two new extra themes; connections and chaoticsoul.

I have also been working on Catalyst::Controller::FormBuilder::DBIC. This module builds FormBuilder interfaces based off DBIC schemas. It should make developing CRUD applications in Catalyst a snap. The unique thing that makes this stand out from other solutions such as Rails scaffolding or the Django admin backend is that Catalyst::Controller::FormBuilder::DBIC builds a formbuilder object at runtime which can be modified in the controller action before sending it off to the view. This enables you to modify any details on the form before displaying to the user. Since no code is written you don't have to scaffold, rewrite and repeat.

Should look something like this:

sub myform : Local Form { my ( $self, $c, $id ) = @_; my $article = $c->model('Typeface::Articles')->find_or_new({id=>$id}); if($self->formbuilder->validate && $self->formbuilder->submitted) { $self->accept_form($article); $article->insert_or_update(); } else { $self->create_form({object => $article}); } $c->stash->{template} = 'test.tt2'; }

I updated the site to fix the feeds that send out urls for http://letsgetdugg.com:9010/*. The issue stemmed from Catalyst not being able to handle proper URL generation for backend servers with the HTTPD engine. Most people tend to run with the FastCGI engine and this issue does not happen there.

Since this is a on-the-seat-of-my-pants fix, My default Typeface theme is out of action, so I have to use the ported wordpress 'connections' theme by vanillamist for now. I am refactoring Typeface's template support to make WordPress theme porting easier.

Plugin to solve the uri_for url generation

package Catalyst::Plugin::ProxyReplyAs; use strict; sub uri_for { my $class = shift; if( $class->config->{proxy_reply_as} ) { my $u = URI->new($class->config->{proxy_reply_as}); $class->req->base($u); } my $result = $class->NEXT::uri_for( @_ ); return $result; } 1;

Add this to your Application.pm in your lib/ directory.

__PACKAGE__->config->{proxy_reply_as} = 'http://myurl.com/';

and this should solve all your url woes.

-Victor

Not sure what that is, looks like some type of arthropod. This really reminds me of that face implant alien from the movies Aliens. Any care to guess what this is?