Actually, I misspoke a bit.. no matter what webengine you use, the bottleneck is still the 4D language engine, which is single-threaded.
For my needs, I just went all out on the hard, within the $10K-$15K range. Dual 2.66GHz Xeon (X5650, total 12 cores, completely overkill for 4D) 32GB RAM (also overkill) and 60GB SSD - the best way to solve a database bottleneck, completely worth the money! Hope this helps.. get the SSD and then check your metrics :) On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Peter Gutbrod <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the replies. > > This is in-line with my observations, that I wasn't able to noticeably slow > down 4D with heavy web accesses to A4D. So I'm going to monitor the load > and > hope performance doesn't change, when my web application gets more traffic. > > I'm using 4DV13 but with NTK as the web server. > > When I've started with A4D (on 4DV12 at that time), I had the impression > after reading the A4D manual, that Aparajita favored NTK slightly over the > 4D web server, frankly more because of possible security issues in 4D's web > server than differences in performance. > > I know, that 4D reworked the network layers in V13 making it multithreaded, > so ranking might have changed since. > > Like to hear your opinion, which one is the better A4D companion now. > > Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > Active4D-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.aparajitaworld.com/listinfo/active4d-dev > Archives: http://active4d-nabble.aparajitaworld.com/ > -- m|a _______________________________________________ Active4D-dev mailing list [email protected] http://list.aparajitaworld.com/listinfo/active4d-dev Archives: http://active4d-nabble.aparajitaworld.com/
