On Fri, 20 Nov 1998, Patrick Logan wrote:
>I'm using [VWNC] for a Web Server (using a Web Server I built in
>    VW similar in concept to the Squeak PWS and an HTML framework I
>    wrote). I'm curious if Squeak has general performance good enough
>    to investigate using it as a web server.
>
>People are using it, so it's going to be a question of what kind of
>performance and features you need.

A lot of it depends on my implementation of the web server so I'm more curious
about Squeak performance in general and particularly it's TCP/IP
implementation.  The rest is all pretty variable and I'll have to see as I go.

>OTOH I would not think the investment worthwhile. Instead I would get
>one of the real Web servers like Apache

I'm already using Apache.  I run the two side by side with Apache serving static
content and Smalltalk serving the dynamic content.

> I would connect one of these Web servers to Smalltalk via CGI or some other
>mechanism.

I avoided CGI because a) I already had the web server written so why build
another piece of middleware? and b) CGI has problems (speed to start up, etc...)

>This way you get all the features you'd otherwise have to build yourself

But I've already built them.  The only thing it really doesn't do is handling
non-html MIME types (images, and such) which is what I use Apache for.

>but you can still do everything you'd like to do with Smalltalk.

>-- 
>Patrick Logan                 mailto:patrickl at gemstone.com
>Voice 503-533-3365            Fax   503-629-8556
>Gemstone Systems, Inc         http://www.gemstone.com

Take care,
--
Jay O'Connor
joconnor at roadrunner.com
http://www.roadrunner.com/~joconnor

"God himself plays the bass strings first when He tunes the soul"