Chuck Esterbrook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You should point out to them that the app server requires substantially
> less load on the server than CGI does.
Not to be a party-pooper or anything, but this isn't that true in this
context. For the span of a single transaction Webware doesn't use as
much resources as a CGI with similar functionality. But on a shared
host it really matters how much resources you use over time. Webware
is still using resources when no one is using is transacting with it,
CGI does not.
A typical site constructed with CGI -- where there are a few portions
that are dynamic, and more portions that are static -- will probably
use less resources over time. This is what most shared hosts are
targetting. Also, a run-away process takes a lot of resources, and
CGI is better protected from this.
It would be spiffy if the adapters -- which are more isolated and
hopefully more robust -- could act as the superego for AppServer,
restarting it if it takes too long, doesn't respond, or isn't there at
all. I suppose that could be as simple as calling an rc script as
[os.]system("webware restart") whenever the connection to the
AppServer is denied or times out.
BTW, I've had a hard time finding that rc script (that maybe Geoff
wrote? Or someone else...) It would be nice if it was part of
Webware, even if it was in a non-committal experimental directory, or
available as a seperate download somewhere.
Ian
_______________________________________________
Webware-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
