give PHP a month and will see if java is needed for *very-large-scale* sites ;) ;)
ropu On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Leonardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > thanks for the replies. > for now I'll play with the "easy" php version... hoping to get so big > so fast to need the very-large-scale java version :) > regarding to the "pick the one that suits you best" question, some > sort of "mod_opensocial" apache module would be great (..it would be > fun to code..) > > thanks > leo > > > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Leonardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> as far as I'm reading, > >> it seems the java version is "better" from a production-ready > perspective. > >> am I wrong? > > > > > > Yes, you're wrong :). What's better is really a matter of what your > current > > architecture looks like. If you're already a PHP (or anything CGI-like) > > based setup, the PHP solution is probably better. If you're using Java, > go > > with the Java version. There are some different performance > characteristics > > of each, but those are language differences more than anything else. > > > > > >> is it only due to the Caja availabilty? > > > > > > Caja is really a non-starter at this point. Nobody's using it because it > > isn't ready yet; when it is ready, it'll definitely be an advantage of a > > java-based deployment, but PHP implementations can always leverage caja > by > > using a web service of some sort. > > > > > >> are there other considerations? (i.e. scalability?) > > > > > > Sure, but these are the same considerations for any "app server" vs. > "cgi" > > setup. The java implementation can handle more simultaneous requests than > > the PHP setup running under apache (due to memory limits), but it also > has a > > much higher baseline memory overhead (due to the JVM). Deploying the PHP > > setup is a lot easier than deploying the java implementation, but you > have > > more options on how you can deploy the java build due to the wide variety > of > > servlet containers out there. > > > > > >> > >> what about other implementations? > >> a full-compliant RoR flavour would be great. > >> > >> Thanks to all > >> leonardo > >> > > > -- .-. --- .--. ..- R o p u
