Guys,

I just had a private mail from JF, so Im relaying it onto the list (as
per his wishes - for some reason he cannot post).

== from JF ==

Salut,

> On Jan 6, 2010, at 12:49 PM, Timothy Perrett wrote:
> Lift does have better comet support than Atmosphere,

:-)

> but it depends
> what your use case is and what you specifically want to do. If you
> chose to run lift with atmosphere you'd essentially be loosing out
> on some of lift's best features. As jonas says, Akka does indeed use
> Atmosphere to good effect, but its a different tool, for a different
> job IMHO (although you can run them in tandem if your use case
> dictates that need).

> So, lets try to add some clarity here by ascertaining what exactly
> you want to do... before this turns into a "my comet is better than
> your comet" flame war ;-)

> How does Lift achieve portability across the various Comet APIs
>supported by Web/App servers?

> Would i be right in assuming that currently only Jetty is supported? [*]


Indeed, this is what I've worked on and what is in the sandbox right
now, e.g Lift could scale *only* on Jetty as only Jetty allow freeing
the calling thread from blocking when suspending (Jetty Continuation).
When deployed on Tomcat, Jetty Continuation block a thread until the
response gets resumed. It may not be an issue for some applications,
but
technically it is still better to avoid blocking a thread.

The idea would be to use Atmosphere CPR to remove that limitation and
instead use Atmosphere so if deployed on Tomcat, Tomcat AOI will be
used. If on Jetty, Continuation will still be used under the hood. And
Atmosphere also support Servlet 3.0 so Lift would get it for free.

I think both community can benefit from the work. Eventually
Atmosphere
will also support Websocket, which is something Lift "may" decide to
support.


> If so the Atmosphere Comet Portable Runtime may be of benefit.

Indeed.

A+

-- Jeanfrancois


== end from JF ==

Cheers, Tim

On Jan 6, 7:49 pm, Paul Sandoz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 2010, at 5:44 PM, David Pollak wrote:
>
>
>
> > I am not suggesting Atmosphere can or should be utilized as a  
> > replacement for the useful features you enumerate. I think the area  
> > where Atmosphere can provide value to lift is scalable async support  
> > for many Web/App servers.
>
> > To date, the large Lift comet users have been using Jetty with  
> > success.  If there is demand for Lift's Comet support on non-Servlet  
> > 3.0 platforms, we'll look into Atmosphere integration.
>
> OK!
>
> Paul.
-- 
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.


Reply via email to