Hi Michel, I didn't ask the question in regards to Gemstone/S VM or the underlying server because I don't have access to that environment. The only HTTP server environments that I have access to in regards to are the following:
<div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>Swazoo 1.0 (Squeak/VW)</div><div>WebToolkit (VW)</div><div>Komache (Squeak)</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>-Conrad<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">
On 9/3/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Philippe Marschall</b> <<a href="mailto:philippe.marschall@gmail.com">philippe.marschall@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
2007/9/3, Bany, Michel <<a href="mailto:mbany@cincom.com">mbany@cincom.com</a>>:<br>><br>><br>> Hi Conrad,<br>><br>> Hi Michel, I have a couple of questions in regards to Seaside on VW:<br>><br>>
<br>> 1) How does one port a Seaside application to Gemstone/S VM in terms of<br>> namespaces? I would<br>> like to use GLASS as my deployment platform but use VW as the<br>> development platform.<br>> I'm certainly not the best person to answer your question, since I have no
<br>> experience with Gemstone.<br>><br>> 2) When upgrading to SeasideForWebToolkit(2.8a1.466.0,mbany), does the<br>> system load the other<br>> packages (i.e. SeasideScriptaculous(2.8a1.216.0,mbany)<br>
> and SeasideTestingBundle(R1.5.5.0,mbany)?<br>> No<br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> 3) Does the SeasideForSwazoo(2.8a1.466.0 ,mbany) use Swazoo 2.0?<br>><br>> It is intended to work with Swazoo as shipped on the VW distribution,
i.e.<br>> Swazoo 1.0.<br>> I just tried it myself with Swazoo 2.0 and could see that SeasideForSwazoo<br>> does not work on top of Swazoo 2.0.<br>> While trying it, I could see that supporting Swazoo 2.0 is nothing trivial,
<br>> so it will take its little time before it is supported.<br><br>I have a very basic server adpater for Swazoo 2 running. I'll post it<br>later today.<br><br>Cheers<br>Philippe<br><br>><br>> 4) Is there any advantage to using SeasideForSwazoo(
2.8a1.466.0,mbany) over<br>><br>> SeasideForWebToolkit(2.8a1.466.0,mbany) in regards to performance?<br>> So far my target for Seaside was WebToolkit, because it is the Cincom<br>> supported web environment in VW.
<br>> I created the Swazoo bindings just to convince myself that there is no<br>> WebToolkit dependency in the port.<br>> However, I never compared the performance of the two. I guess they must be<br>> somehow more or less kind of equal.
<br>> On the other hand, it appears that Swazoo is the server of choice for some<br>> Seaside users, so there must be some advantage in Swazoo but I do not<br>> remember what the motivations were.<br>><br>> I see some contradictions in your questions : you care about the performance
<br>> of two VW solutions while your deployment target is Gemstone. I would better<br>> understand if you were querying about the performance advantage of using<br>> Gemstone over VW.<br>><br>> HTH<br>> Michel.
<br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Seaside mailing list<br>> <a href="mailto:Seaside@lists.squeakfoundation">Seaside@lists.squeakfoundation</a>.org<br>> <a href="http://lists.squeakfoundation">
http://lists.squeakfoundation</a>.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside<br>><br>><br>_______________________________________________<br>Seaside mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Seaside@lists.squeakfoundation">Seaside@lists.squeakfoundation
</a>.org<br><a href="http://lists.squeakfoundation">http://lists.squeakfoundation</a>.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside<br></blockquote></div><br></div>