Marius, Thanks! That was just what I needed. It's a web analytics app, so there's a lot of CRUD and reporting pages that are a great fit with Lift. The raw servlet is the tracking pixel that goes down on pages, hence the performance requirements. It really just looks at a couple haders, calls a couple actors, and returns. Maybe 10 lines of code. It's nice running it in the same container, as I can send some of these events to CometActors.
Thanks again, -Mark On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Marius <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Dec 22, 3:29 am, "Mark Chadwick" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Howdy. > > > > From my googling, I'm gathering this is a tall order (due to the servlet > > spec), but thought I'd ping the list to see if smarter brains than my own > > had an idea. The idea is that I have particular URL with strict latency > > requirements that I'd like to run in the same servlet container as my > lift > > app. > > Doyou want to run int in the same container or ins the same web app? > If you run in in the same container only you can have different web > apps mapped of course with different context paths. If you want your > raw servlet to be deployed in the same web app as your Lift > application than you can tell Lift that a certain path must not be > processed by Lift and instead "resolved" by container. Please see > LiftRules.liftRequest variable.So in boot you can say: > > LiftRules.liftRequest.append(liftReq) > > where liftReq is a LiftRules.LiftRequestPF which is defined as > > type LiftRequestPF = PartialFunction[Req, Boolean] > > if you return false that specific request will be passed to the > container. > > My question would be ... what does your raw servlet do? ... perhaps > you can achieve the same thing using lift itself more elegantly :) > > > I have, for the time being, written this as a raw servlet and routed > > it accordingly in my web.xml. Though this passed through the LiftFilter > in > > 0.9, the performance hit was within reason. I tried to research how to > > entirely bypass a filter, but the consensus was that if the URLs matched > up, > > I'm out of luck. That's okay. > > > > I've switched over to the 0.10-SNAPSHOT, and it appears that hitting my > > servlet resource is now generating a 404. I've done some digging in the > > source, but haven't found much. > > > > So, the open question: Am I way off base? Should I just serve my Lift > app > > under a prefix other than / ? I do like clean URLs. Is there a way to > have > > a servlet bypass or be directly routed by the LiftFilter, even if there's > an > > instantiation overhead of the framework? > > > > Thanks, > > -Mark > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
