On 8 Aug 2007, at 14:08, Tom Jackson wrote:
general indications? Uhhh, I mean what is memcache, how do you use
it and why
is it useful? Otherwise, it isn't useful to me or anyone else
without a clue.
http://www.danga.com/memcached/ is brilliant. I have not used it in
AOLserver yet, though. T
On Tuesday 07 August 2007 19:20, Bas Scheffers wrote:
> For caching people's profile or product pages and such, memcache
> obviously is the best way to go, however.
I'm always interested in how-to stuff. Are there any examples of use, or just
general indications? Uhhh, I mean what is memcache, ho
On 7 Aug 2007, at 23:07, Dossy Shiobara wrote:
1) JavaScript: the SpiderMonkey JS engine is thread-safe and I've been
integrating it into AOLserver (see: nsjsapi). John Resig has
started
I'll have a look at that soon!
On Apache, lacking nsv's (and nv's), folks use memcache. Naturally,
Jeff,
I cut out what I said, but believe me I have never made an argument that
Apache was better than AOLserver for anything other than extreme mass hosting
of cgi style applications. If you eliminate fastcgi, maybe you could consider
them even, I don't know. But there will always be a differen
On 2007.08.07, Jeff Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok then, first up on the FUQ list (that's frequently unasked questions):
>
> Q: How do I run AOLserver when I already have apache running on port 80?
>
> A: There's lots of ways, some of which may not work due to your
> particular politic
On 2007.08.07, Jeff Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Over in naviserver Vlad (I think) did a bunch of work on vmalloc which
> tries to actually release the memory back to the system (rather than
> just the shared pool) on thread exit to keep the process size smaller
> still. I don't recall w
On 2007.08.07, John Buckman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I use AOLserver + lighthttpd on the same machine, different IPs, so
> that mp3s and GIF/JPEGs are fed off lighthttpd, which is stupid and
> very fast (it's wikipedia's media server)
Out of curiousity--have you benchmarked lighttpd vs. AO
On 2007.08.07, Jeff Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Idle curiosity - I wonder if anyone is running a system with both apache
> and aolserver listening on port 80 on different ifs/ips. Should be
> possible and not even difficult, tho probably of limited utility.
I certainly do this--I run Ap
On 2007.08.07, Dani?l Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... and there is one TCL library,
There is a shared global Tcl library as well as a per-virtual server Tcl
library. The shared global one is in PREFIX/modules/tcl, while the
per-server Tcl library is configured using:
ns_section "ns
Daniël Mantione wrote:
I'm not to happy to call it a marketing issue, because this suggests that
if you would have a big enough advertising campain, you can make AOLserver
win from Apache. This is not the case.
Software lock-in is very difficult to undo (ever try to get someone to
change the
I find that the tight coupling of Tcl and AOLserver is really an
advantage. You get the Tcl API that comes with the server: thread
API, connection API, scheduling API, job control, etc: http://
www.aolserver.com/docs/devel/tcl/api/
Tcl is not as widely known as Java/Perl/PHP so most compani
Over in naviserver Vlad (I think) did a bunch of work on vmalloc which
tries to actually release the memory back to the system (rather than
just the shared pool) on thread exit to keep the process size smaller
still. I don't recall what the ultimate outcome of it was however.
-J
Nathan Folkm
It is possible. ;) There are a number of other things you can do as well to
help. One example is configuring your threads such that they die and get
reaped after a certain number of requests or time. This will cause memory
that is currently tied up in the thread's memory pool to be returned back to
Op Tue, 7 Aug 2007, schreef Jeff Rogers:
> I'm not trying to be super-advocate boy here, but it just seems like everyone
> here is making arguments as to why aolserver really isn't good enough compared
> to apache and it saddens me - if the support community doesn't believe in the
> product, wha
Op Tue, 7 Aug 2007, schreef Nathan Folkman:
> You might also want to try running AOLserver without the Tcl threaded
> allocator (Zippy). You might want to try Hoard or if on Linux maybe give
> Google's TCMalloc a shot. Remember, the "Zippy" allocator is optimized for
> lock avoidance, and this c
Idle curiosity - I wonder if anyone is running a system with both
apache and
aolserver listening on port 80 on different ifs/ips. Should be
possible and
not even difficult, tho probably of limited utility.
Yes, I have setups like this and is the best solution to this problem.
However, in ma
I have several interfaces, but one of my interfaces is configured with
apache on port 80, and several AOLServer instances on other ports.
Apache serves some pages/applications itself and forwards the rest to
AOLServer.
Rusty
Daniël Mantione wrote:
Op Tue, 7 Aug 2007, schreef Jeff Rogers:
Op Tue, 7 Aug 2007, schreef Tom Jackson:
> None of the issues listed really have a solution. The truth is that if you
> are
> doing mass hosting, you should use Apache, the memory footprint is just too
> great at some point with AOLserver because you have to load each server at
> startup. At
Op Tue, 7 Aug 2007, schreef Jeff Rogers:
> Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
> > > I think this may be more of a marketing issue than a technical one.
> > > What does
> > > apache do that aolserver doesn't?
> >
> > If have had very few situations that could rely 100% on AOLserver. Be it
> > PHP scripts
Tom Jackson wrote:
None of the issues listed really have a solution. The truth is that if you are
doing mass hosting, you should use Apache, the memory footprint is just too
great at some point with AOLserver because you have to load each server at
startup. At the very least all code for all vi
You might also want to try running AOLserver without the Tcl threaded
allocator (Zippy). You might want to try Hoard or if on Linux maybe give
Google's TCMalloc a shot. Remember, the "Zippy" allocator is optimized for
lock avoidance, and this comes at the cost of greater memory overhead.
- n
On 8
Op Tue, 7 Aug 2007, schreef Jeff Rogers:
> Idle curiosity - I wonder if anyone is running a system with both apache and
> aolserver listening on port 80 on different ifs/ips. Should be possible and
> not even difficult, tho probably of limited utility.
Yes, I have setups like this and is the b
None of the issues listed really have a solution. The truth is that if you are
doing mass hosting, you should use Apache, the memory footprint is just too
great at some point with AOLserver because you have to load each server at
startup. At the very least all code for all virtual servers is in
Daniël Mantione wrote:
I think this may be more of a marketing issue than a technical one. What does
apache do that aolserver doesn't?
If have had very few situations that could rely 100% on AOLserver. Be it
PHP scripts (yes, I know you can install PHP in AOLserver), multi-user
requirements
Op Tue, 7 Aug 2007, schreef Jeff Rogers:
> Daniël Mantione wrote:
>
> > I think a few reasons contribute to the low popularity of AOLserver
> > * It interoperates badly with Apache. Both need port 80. While solutions
> > exits, none is ideal, and none come with "Batteries included".
> > Many p
Daniël Mantione wrote:
I think a few reasons contribute to the low popularity of AOLserver
* It interoperates badly with Apache. Both need port 80. While solutions
exits, none is ideal, and none come with "Batteries included".
Many people (most) cannot rely 100% on AOLserver, despite ocnsi
On 2007.08.07, Bas Scheffers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I always shake my head when this "lets implement PHP/Ruby/TechDuJour
> in AOLserver, that will make it popular" comes up. First of all
> everyone seems to find that only Tcl is any good a threading, so you
> can't make other languages
Op Tue, 7 Aug 2007, schreef Bas Scheffers:
> > all layers are easily interchangeable. You can use Apache + MySQL with
> > Perl, Python or Ruby. You can use Perl/Python/Ruby with Postgresql or
> I think that is hitting the nail on the head: "You can use Apache + MySQL...".
> People think web deve
28 matches
Mail list logo
