As with all good code, you start by writing it :) On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 1:02 AM, Leonardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I write often apache modules for my company. > I too prefer to code in pure C and then bind through native extensions > / apache modules. > I'm not too much skilled but I get nice results sometimes. > If I could help.. it would be great :) > where can I start from? > > > > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 8:18 AM, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was a big proponent of doing a pure C implementation originally -- it > > would be trivial to convert it to a php extension, apache module, python > > library, etc. > > > > I actually wrote some code to start the task way back around the time 0.5 > > was coming out (probably before you even proposed shindig :)). > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:34 PM, Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > >> mod_shindig would be a blast to write, actually. No idea *when* -- but > >> would > >> be fun. Apache makes C fun again -- you get to punt on all(1) the memory > >> management! > >> > >> -Brian > >> > >> 1) Where "all" means the kind of punting you get to do in most GC'd > >> languages, not forget altogether. > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Eiji Kitamura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > > >> > It's very interesting. > >> > Gonna be really great if there's OpenSocial apache module > >> > mod_opensocial.so. > >> > Hope there'll be someone who's crazy enough to implement it :) > >> > > >> > 2008/6/20 Leonardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > > sooo great! > >> > > but I have to insist... > >> > > > >> > > LoadModule osc_module modules/mod_opensocial.so > >> > > > >> > > try to be faster ;) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > (yes... I'm a *bit* exhagerated....) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > good night to all! > >> > > (at least, here is time to sleep!) > >> > > > >> > > leo > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 1:01 AM, Ropu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> 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 > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
