On 29/04/2010, at 7:06 PM, Oleg Pronin wrote: > [...] > Maybe it is not the bottleneck, but how many places do we have > like this that are "not a bottleneck" ? maybe the sum of all these > "mini" mistakes is the bottleneck ?
I've done some research on this topic, not from a computer science POV, but from the business end. Of the popular web frameworks, Catalyst clearly runs some extremely popular websites, in a variety of sectors. If the micro-bottlenecks were a problem for achieving scale, then Catalyst would not be usable for these entities. Catalyst hits the sweet spot for lone coders like me, who use it to manage some kinds of messy research data (e.g. http://github.com/singingfish/Text-TranscriptMiner-Web) to mainstream content providers like the BBC, entities in the adult industry (always bandwidth hogs) and social media providers. In both cases it's the speed of the development cycle, and the ease with which it's possible to optimise around pain points on a case by case basis that is the main benefit. So I'm really don't think your argument has substance. _______________________________________________ List: Catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
