[Seaside] Re: Confused over the use of WAExternalFileLibrary...
boris at deepcovelabs.com
Tue Jun 17 12:45:38 UTC 2008
Oh, now we are back to 'my gun is bigger than your gun' discussion again. It's great that one can achieve decent performance serving content with a built in server, let's have a group hug and move on ;)
Thanks, Lukas, it's nice to see that piece get addressed. It means I can mostly get rid of my own directory emulation library and just dump files from an image into a subdirectory marked with a version number on deployment.
-Boris (via BlackBerry)
----- Original Message -----
From: seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org <seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
To: Seaside - general discussion <seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Tue Jun 17 04:26:22 2008
Subject: Re: [Seaside] Re: Confused over the use of WAExternalFileLibrary...
Michael Lucas-Smith wrote:
> Randal: Inefficient? That's a random stretch, if you're using
> Opentalk-HTTP then it's not going to be particularly inefficient and
> it's a wild call to assume that Komanche and Swazoo would be slow
> without trying it out.
Swazoo is definitely not inefficient serving static content anymore, on
VW is now only 4x slower than Apache, achieving 36MBytes/s, which is
about 300Mbits/s, that is 3 times saturation of 100M ethernet:
How much is Opentalk-HTTP able to achieve?
Smalltalk Web Application Server
seaside mailing list
seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the seaside