I didn't start this thread, but I feel the need to respond here. Dave Watts wrote: >>I don't know about Solaris, but on Linux, patches get >>installed nightly through up2date or yum on Redhat, and I've >>never had anything break because of it (nor do I know of >>anyone else who has). The process also NEVER needs a reboot. > > > That's good for you, but a simple Google search will turn up people who've > been less fortunate than you. I've had my own troubles with glibc in the > past, although my lack of Linux expertise didn't make things easier for me, > admittedly.
I can confirm that in the 8 years that I've been managing Linux environments, I've dealt with 3 issues that were related to bad patches. > >>I'm not very clear of what you do to test patches anyway. >>Obviously, unless you have a huge budget, you can't have a >>duplicate of every server just so you can test patches on it. >> And if you test it on a development server with one >>configuration, there is no guarantee that it won't break on a >>production server with a slightly different configuration. > > > This is the entire purpose behind separating development, staging and > production servers. Lots of people do this, with identical configurations > across all three environments. How else do you do testing? Especially load > testing? You two appear to be talking about two different types of development environments. Perhaps with *huge* clients who can afford to spend huge amounts of time and energy doing mostly pointless and speculative patch testing - this would be worth while because for them - 10 minutes of down time would cost them more then the cost of the technical staff that does all that testing. However, for the 5-10 person development shop (which most development companies are) this is not a practical solution. It would cost more to set up the infrastructure for this then it would to simply deal with the extremely rare patch problems when they arise. >>Looking at the docs, I wouldn't say the syntax is any easier >>then mod_rewrite, and by the time I learned it, I would be >>wondering why I didn't just install Apache instead of >>spending $99 per box for the license of ISAPI Rewrite. > > > I think you're missing the point. I didn't say the syntax was any easier. > Regular expressions tend to make my head hurt, no matter where they are. You > said, "you can't do x", and I said, "yes, in fact, you can do x". As for why > you wouldn't just install Apache instead, there are all sorts of possible > reasons for this. If your answer to every problem is to rip out existing > infrastructure and replace it with your own preferred infrastructure, you'll > find yourself causing more problems than you fix. Maybe he did miss your point, but it looks to me like you are also missing his. Why pay for something that you have to learn - when you could just learn it without having to pay for it before-hand? Also, again, you two appear to be talking about two different infrastructures. You're right that it's quite impractical to approach a large, established infrastructure and say "let's rebuild this from the ground up!" but it doesn't sound to me like that the position that he's coming from. > Also, there is a free version of ISAPI Rewrite, which has been sufficient > for many of my clients. Free is good. People like free. >>There is no need for API since the configuration is in a text >>file, which is easy enough to manipulate using any >>programming language. > > > You're honestly saying that being able to directly manipulate a text file is > superior to having an API? Are you on crack? Of course, again, the IIS 6 > metabase is XML, which is just a text file after all. I do not see the word "superior" in the above paragraph. It is, however, quite easy to manipulate a text file in almost any programming language. > Would you seriously recommend Mono for production > hosting of ASP.NET apps? It's my understanding that this is the whole point of the Mono project. However, seeing as I tent to avoid MS-related technology, I haven't dealt with it much. > In any case, I think you're missing my point entirely, or are simply > unwilling to acknowledge it. I'll go ahead and restate it here, and then I'm > done. For the purposes of most CF developers, who aren't server > administrators, there is no substantive difference between IIS and Apache You contradict yourself here Dave. You just spent an entire email stating what differences there were (differences that do indeed effect web developers) and then you say that there's no substantive difference. There's plenty of substantive difference - as you've illustrated in favor of IIS. > neither "beats the pants off" the other Again, this totally depends on where you're coming from - as you yourself have stated previously. If you've already got an established infrastructure that uses IIS, then clearly IIS would "beat the pants off" Apache because using Apache simply would not make sense here. However, there are many, many ways where Apache would be a viable alternative to IIS - and that's something you appear reluctant to talk about. and time spent learning one after > you know enough about the other to write and test applications is time that > could be spent on something else. I personally see nothing wrong with taking time to learn something that could potentially save my company time and money - and how will I know for sure unless I explore those options? I think that is all most people are trying to do when they post things to this list regarding non-MS software. Quite frankly, I don't understand why you are so against learning about your alternatives. I don't know about you, but I like learning new things even if it's just for the sake of learning. It's part of why I enjoy the technology industry so much. So why not put that effort somewhere that would be beneficial to me and my company? The fact that this isn't self-evident to > you, that we're even having this discussion, boggles my mind. > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > http://www.figleaf.com/ Indeed. Understanding someone else's point of view is quite difficult at times! =) -Jordan ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:267244 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
