Either this is a poor attempt at humor (indicating a naive or dangerous opionated author), or the testing isn't thorough (indicating the author isn't thorough enough to care despite making very bold claims about similar software). Neither lead to very promising conclusions about the quality of the software.
I've read somewhere that, a laboratory has been able to to acheive this level. I'm unable to find the article to back this claim up, however.
(I'm a .NET developer)
I realise that my writing style can sometimes be seen as abrasive, but I still don't think that I've done a very good job of explaining my surprise that a) GWAN exists at all, or b) people are actually using it..
I spent a whole weekend trying to get my head inside it, and eventually gave up, after wondering what on earth I was doing.
if(s == '%' && s == '2' && s == '0') // escaped space?
False. Gentoo is all about control and configurability.
1. Very fast
1. Author looks unstable. (S)He may leave the project causing technical debt. Mitigation : Use the proxy in some standard way ?
2. Author's criticism of open source. Seriously ? You will not use someone's software because of his/her political opinion ?
3. Non-open source. How many of us use Windows ? Linux with binary blobs ? Fully open processors ?
4. Author seems conceited. So what ? (S)He managed to do something no one else has, shouldn't (s)he be proud ?
This is probably not a product I would ever recommend to anyone. It's not a product I would deploy myself on an important project, but the level of negativity and name calling against the product and the author is completely unwarranted. He has a right to his opinion, and he has a right to distribute his product however he wants. You have a right not to use it and to criticize him - but keep it respectful!
e.g.: "Experience is simply the name we give our mistakes." - Oscar Wilde
5. Nobody appears to use it. No community.
6. Example code is bizarre and irrational.
7. Benchmarks are probably not representative of real-world workloads.
it might fly in the world of Windows, but i can't see this becoming a thing on Linux.
I would like to see some independent testing, by somebody who is alert for benchmark-cheating hacks.
it seems to do what it says
This server will not respect contexts which will change what the user sees. It just games the benchmarks with an in-memory cache.
This, and the fact that he seemingly chose to obfuscate random strings in the binary with an absolutely trivial cipher, make me quite wary of trusting this.
These guys are, in all likelihood, selling gourmet food snake-oil.
Interestingly they do not provide a windows version of the server, citing it being slower than the nix one, which entirely ignores that quite a few people develop on windows and deploy to nix.
Edit: Oh wow.
http://gwan.ch/insurance : "To Secure your Investment on G-WAN... ...Buy G-WAN's Source Code!"
There's no way a properly written C# program would take IIS + ASP.Net C# ............ 171.8 ms! A bare bone Katana/OWIN self-hosted hello world echoing endpoint can easily surpass 5K+ req/s while the equivalent ASP.NET MVC hello world echoing endpoint can surpass 3.5K+ req/s with the standard routing.
I suspect the biggest contributor to the slowness is all that string concatenation - because every 'version' of a string is hashed and stored in memory e.g. "a" ["a"], "a" + "b" ["a","b","ab"] etc. (use StringBuilder or write directly to the output)
I suspect the Java benchmark also suffers due to this. (use StringBuffer)
Also there seem to be some people creating projects with it on Github: https://github.com/search?p=1&q=gwan&ref=cmdform&type=Reposi... I thought you might be interested in the code :)
I am always skeptical of any claim of more than twice of an improvement over things that are already highly optimized (like nginx).
Found this list of "customers" http://twd-industries.com/customers.html but not sure if gwan users or what websites.
g-wan website needs a redesign for certain
How trustworthy, the person that is listed after the Developer is his legal backup.