Re: CGI, semicolons, and so on... (Rob McCool)
Message-id: <>
From: (Rob McCool)
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 14:02:32 -0600
In-Reply-To: Fisher Mark <>
       "Re: CGI, semicolons, and so on..." (Dec 30,  8:20am)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: tcemail!, www-talk <>
Subject: Re: CGI, semicolons, and so on...
Content-Length: 1136
 * Re: CGI, semicolons, and so on...  by Fisher Mark (
 *    written on Dec 30,  8:20am.
 * The opacity or virtualization of the present scheme is nice, as the user of 
 * the URL does not have to concern her or himself with whether it represents 
 * a physical file or it is data created on the fly -- he or she just uses it.
I agree.
 * As far as the overhead for a single stat() call, I think that it is pretty 
 * small in the scheme of things.  Why even try writing a server in Perl, an 
 * interpreted language (which I love), if you need to worry about the overhead 
 * of a single stat() call?  Why even write one in C or C++ rather than 
 * assembler if a single stat call() can make the difference between a server 
 * with good response time vs. a server with poor response time?

Well, if it was one stat(), you would be right... however, at times it can
get up to five or six. The overhead for this isn't really significant on a
stock filesystem, but over NFS or AFS (especially AFS) it becomes
significant, and in some cases it becomes large enough to become prohibitive.