On 6/2/03 3:47 am, "Niclas Hedhman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 06 February 2003 02:26, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
>> Oh, absolutely, I don't like that either... But in my specific case (VNU,
>> with somewhat 8000/9000 hits per minute (we peak up sometimes at 400 hits
>> per second), we need to use tricks (yes, tricks/hacks) to make that happen,
>> because passing through (even on localhost) binary data at that rate is
>> sometimes overkilling...
>
> Shouldn't you in this case have front-end load balancing routers (various
> topologies available) to lower the load on each server?
Wish I could... I can't have (because of a fucked up design and
implementation before I came on board) 2 instances running (they clash on
the database side... Who is the idiot storing the status of a cache in the
servlet container in the database where the data to be cached is? Jules!)
Anyhow. Yes, when I rewrite the entire site to run with Cocoon, or with
anything else that allows me to have several instances running at the same
time, well, maybe I will...
> Sounds like you are spending thousands of engineering dollars in optimization
> solutions, when the same dollars can buy you a quick and reliable solution
> off-the-shelf.... And you can spend that engineering time on something more
> useful.
It's not thousands of dollars, boy I'm _not_ that expensive... :-)
Anyhow, the "who cares? Go and buy something off-the-shelf" attitude is _so_
wrong... Ok, I'll go shopping in Tottenham Ct. Road and forget about
thinking that there might be a better and more intelligent way out???
Gee, with that attitude noone would have even thought about writing Apache
2, you have such a perfect solution going and buying M$IIS off the shelf :-)
:-) :-)
Pier
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
