If licence type is not an issue, which of those two servers is
recommended on squeak for samller memory footprint and better performance (file uploads are not important)? thanks, Davorin Rusevljan http://www.cloud208.com/ _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
in our experience that's taste. The http server inside the image is
far from being the bottleneck of the apps sebastian On 04/12/2009, at 15:59, Davorin Rusevljan <[hidden email]> wrote: > If licence type is not an issue, which of those two servers is > recommended on squeak for samller memory footprint and better > performance (file uploads are not important)? > > thanks, > > Davorin Rusevljan > http://www.cloud208.com/ > _______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
In reply to this post by drush66
I took a serious look at this question when I was considering which server to use for WIkiServer on the iPhone
Earlier this year what I found: Swazoo seemed faster in some cases. Comanche seemed to produced less garbage thus stressing the GC less. Neither respected their promise not to cache 500MB images in memory until a few minor fixes where make. However on the iPhone we discovered that Swazoo would drop a byte or two in the upload/download of 50MB files. We were unable to re-create on faster devices, or to point out exactly where/how it happened. This problem was packaged up and sent off to the Swazoo support folks, and it could be fixed now? Or not affect Server based implementations? Lossing bytes was the show-stopper, otherwise the difference was a wash. On 2009-12-04, at 9:59 AM, Davorin Rusevljan wrote: > If licence type is not an issue, which of those two servers is > recommended on squeak for samller memory footprint and better > performance (file uploads are not important)? > > thanks, > > Davorin Rusevljan > http://www.cloud208.com/ > _______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside -- =========================================================================== John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]> Twitter: squeaker68882 Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com =========================================================================== _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
In reply to this post by drush66
A similar question was raised on stackoverflow:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1583145/performance-differences-between-swazoo-and-komanche Lukas 2009/12/4 Davorin Rusevljan <[hidden email]>: > If licence type is not an issue, which of those two servers is > recommended on squeak for samller memory footprint and better > performance (file uploads are not important)? > > thanks, > > Davorin Rusevljan > http://www.cloud208.com/ > _______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |