I've seen some comments/postings to HN about g-wan, and I still can't work out if it's some really elaborate troll or not. Has anyone played with it? I can't imagine that this very strange license section in the FAQ: http://gwan.ch/faq#license, is going to help people want to try it!
It isn't a troll, the performance numbers are real and it is a fairly slick product.
Bad marketing, bad licensing, crazy (ala Tesla) developer and owner being allowed to dump his brain onto the corporate site are the main problems.
When we deep dove on it, we were driven off by the site oddities and authors nonsense more than the tech (which impressed us) -- but you don't put your corporation in the hands of crazy -- even with "Source Insurance" (which is a great idea, but needs a little more explanation for US lawyers).
That said, I am reviewing it again because I am dealing with an actual CPU bound problem domain.
The formatting and the delivery on that site are confusing; both feel somewhat aggressive. It could just be a chinese / cultural / marketing thing we're not used to, or maybe the author's a little too confident.
Based on a quick google, it does appear GWAN is massively fast at serving static files, and it does appear to be gaining traction for script-based use-cases.
I'd be interested in seeing more real-world benchmarks.
edit Grammar