On 4/14/05, David Shaffer <cdshaffer at acm.org> wrote:
> Ramiro Diaz Trepat wrote:
> 
> >On 4/14/05, Tim Rowledge <tim at sumeru.stanford.edu> wrote:
> >Ramiro Diaz Trepat <ramirodt at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>>I believe that no serious server software will ever be possible
> >>>without preemtive multitasking, probably no client sofware either.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Really? Have you not read about SeaSide, possibly the best webserver around?
> >>And we have a variety of net clients for things like IRC, mail, ftp, a
> >>webbrowser etc.
> >>
> >>
> >Are you serious ????
> >I appreciate A LOT all the improvements in Squeak applications, and
> >the servers like SeaSide, but if you really think that they can
> >compete (any of them) with their non Squeak counterparts in the real
> >world, you have to be the most irrational guy I red in years.
> >Why do you think that no large web site uses Squeak?  Just because
> >they are stupid computer illiterates?  The guys at Amazon, e-Bay,
> >Google, Yahoo; they are just jerks, right?
> >
> >
> 
> Now things are getting carried away.  They systems are relatively
> unique.  They achieve massive data throughput by throwing lots of
> [snip]
It's just too immature for me, to say that something as new, and hence
untested as webservers or mail clients in Squeak are the best of their
kind in the world.

> >I know that languages like Java managed to do it properly, so I don't
> >believe that argument.   Application Servers that are completely built
> >in Java run perfectly on Windows, Linux, Solaris, etc. I see this
> >every day.
> >So there has to be a way.
> 
> OK, now I know you're trolling.  Anyone who says any java application
May be :)

> server "runs perfectly" has never administrated one.  I've got
> Tomcat/JBoss/apache and several years with a standalone WebSphere server
> and I can tell you that stability is not their strong suit.  What I
I'm sorry your experience was so unfortunate.  Our J2EE application
runs stable under load on Solaris / SunOne / Oracle,
Linux/Apache/PostgreSQL, and WebSphere.as well.


> can't say, and what you seem to be avoiding pinpointing in your
> discussion, is if threading has anything to do with the problem.  One
I said that because someone in the thread said that it couldn't be
implemented, that things would run so differently.
As you can see, I am not a big theorist, but if I don't remember
wrong, you cannot assume anything about the order in which threads
will be executed or when will your thread be preempted when writing
multithreded code.  And if you have to enforce or assure some
situation, you have to use semaphores or something equivalent.  And
hence you should get similar results in all platforms.
Again, I am a manager and have not coded for production software in a
while, so I know I might be missing something big.  I'm just trying to
use common sense.
I screen Squeak's maturity every now and then because I really like
it, and I would love to start usinig it at our company.


> Claiming that
> the app servers "run perfectly" has nothing to do with portable
> threading semantics.  It just means they've done there jobs and avoided
> the pitfalls...again, in my opinion it also means that you've never used
> them seriously (under memory and CPU load, that is).
Our application runs, for instance, on large banks with thousands of
users doning very complex operations.
It's not that it was a pice of cake.  But it does run stable and under
load.  You can't just say that Java Application Servers can't do the
job, indeed e-Bay runs on WebSphere and they handle it pretty well.



-- 
http://neosmt.com