If you're just doing it for fun and some experience, go make your bastard half-breed.
I wouldn't say an application that directly implements the HTTP protocol but isn't a general purpose web-server is a half-breed. SWAT is one well-known example.
But if you're just interested in better performance you could get 95% of the way there just by switching to fast-cgi.
A reasonable course of action for a general-purpose web-server, but when you've got a CGI that is doing everything anyway, I don't see the value in keeping the first tier.
And if you want absolute balls to the wall performance, rewrite as a user-space TUX module...
Well, lots of big iron gets crushed by the slashdot effect too.
This thing is running on a piddly little Sun, after all.
And it was very responsive early.
One thing that does seem to work against the onslaught is a
throttling webserver.
If you haven't got the bandwidth etc to serve a sudden onslaught of requests, probably the best thing to do is to just start 503'ing -- at least people get a quick message 'come back later' instead of just dead air.
Apache is cool and all, but I wonder if it is still the right tool for a lot of sites -- it has every feature under the sun, but it seems to me that more and more sites are getting more and more specialized and thus needing less and less of these features.
Once upon a time, we had 1 web server that did everything, so it needed to be able to do everything. Now everytime we do something new we toss out a new webserver (or 2 or 10 of 'em).
And they all basically need to do one thing (webmail, portal, whatnot) and do it well and that's it.
So we've got a whole bunch of Apache servers which a bucket load of apache processes who basically spend all day doing little more than exec'ing the same CGI over and over (and copying the data around a couple of extra times).
I'm pretty much now convinced that would my next step is going to be to franken-meld my cgi with something like
mini-httpd
so it is a single, persistant, app.
I'm certainly not redoing the whole thing in Java though!:)
According to the article:
The e570 is one of the smallest devices on the market; its only bulge appears in its thickness because of the two slots. Both a lightweight and a small guy.
Finally USA gets a top domain like all the other countries have. It might bring some order to the chaos.
First, we've have a top level domain like all the other contries have had -- each with their own rules and rulers -- it's just that ours were outstandingly misguided.
However, I have little confidence that the new ones will be any better.
In any event, there is no chance that <big-american-corp>
is going to give up <big-american-corp>.com -- they'll just have <big-american-corp>.com.us too -- wheeee, won't that be special!
The system Nebula consists of a ceiling projector linked via the Internet to a database of content. Once users have selected the content for projection, they can manipulate it simply by adjusting their sleeping positions and interacting with their partner while in bed.
Universities claim that everything is vital to everything they do -- that's just their nature.
For decades campus computing was largely ignored, but now that there's real money in it, the unblinking gaze of the bean counters is focused upon it (being the dinosaurs that they are, it will take a few years for the nerve impulses of the dotcom die off to reach such the central administrative nerve center).
The true meaning of this attention, while originally flattering, has begun to sink into the mind of the researchers, and predictably they have discovered the faustian nature of their bargain.
... our lack of ability to deal with population control (even in the US)...
Actually, the birth rate in the U.S. and in much of the 'first world' is below replacement level (and in some places, is precipitously low --
Italy for one).
Population increases will continue for a couple of decades due to inertia, imigration, and lengthening lifespan, but if the trends continue, the population will decline.
Of course, this isn't all rosy news, as it means a world with many old people and few children -- in some countries the median age may well approach 60!
It's probably because, generally speaking, programmers can make a more than adequate income at their 'day job', while artists and musicians are, well, starving.
After all, 'free time' is basically how all the comforts of life came about in the first place!:)
There's already something that works along these lines called ODBCSocketServer. Basically it's an ODBCServer that sits on your WinBloze box and ships out the results in XML. Something like:
Re:Artificial Criteria
on
Good to Great
·
· Score: 2
My observation are:
They seem to be implying that the only way to get from good to great is to leap.
That great is defined as 3x market performance for 15 years.
Of course, this asks the questions:
Is greatness defined by stock price?
Is 15 years a relevant period of time?
It's been said that the difference between Americans and Europeans is that Europeans think 100 miles is a long ways and Americans think 100 years is a long time!
Artificial Criteria
on
Good to Great
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
At the core of Collins's criteria was that a good-to-great company had to have "fifteen-year cumulative stock returns at or below the general stock market, punctuated by a transition point, then cumulative returns at least three times the market over the next fifteen years.
Ok, so this immediately disqualifies any business started in the last 30 years.
And it also disqualifies any company where the startup period took less than 15 years.
And it also disqualifies any company where the rise was less sudden or less dramatic.
Is it any wonder that very few companies fit this particular mold?
And is it the right mold?
And which is the better company, one that sucked for 15 years, then got the right break and performed 3x the market for 15 years, or one that say, has merely done 1.5x the market for 100 years?
And which is likely to have just as sudden a decline?
As near as I can see these are all questions left unanswered...
Slashdot Mirror
MicroSoft, RIAA, DMCA...
You're playing with the big boys.
Where do you see yourself ending up?
It's not just a matter of buying 1000 whatevers that worked for the guy doing it for 150.
I wouldn't say an application that directly implements the HTTP protocol but isn't a general purpose web-server is a half-breed. SWAT is one well-known example.
But if you're just interested in better performance you could get 95% of the way there just by switching to fast-cgi.
A reasonable course of action for a general-purpose web-server, but when you've got a CGI that is doing everything anyway, I don't see the value in keeping the first tier.
And if you want absolute balls to the wall performance, rewrite as a user-space TUX module...
That's an incorrect platform assumption...
One thing that does seem to work against the onslaught is a throttling webserver. If you haven't got the bandwidth etc to serve a sudden onslaught of requests, probably the best thing to do is to just start 503'ing -- at least people get a quick message 'come back later' instead of just dead air.
It's pretty easy to just do:
...
for (;;) {
n = select(...);
perConnStructPtr = getPerConnPtrByFd(anActiveFd);
}
after all.
Once upon a time, we had 1 web server that did everything, so it needed to be able to do everything. Now everytime we do something new we toss out a new webserver (or 2 or 10 of 'em). And they all basically need to do one thing (webmail, portal, whatnot) and do it well and that's it.
So we've got a whole bunch of Apache servers which a bucket load of apache processes who basically spend all day doing little more than exec'ing the same CGI over and over (and copying the data around a couple of extra times).
I'm pretty much now convinced that would my next step is going to be to franken-meld my cgi with something like mini-httpd so it is a single, persistant, app.
I'm certainly not redoing the whole thing in Java though! :)
Money is just a convenient unit of measure for power.
Is essentially the same story
According to the article: The e570 is one of the smallest devices on the market; its only bulge appears in its thickness because of the two slots. Both a lightweight and a small guy.
It's about the same weight and height as iPAQ.
Sure, when you put it that way it all seems so perfectly reasonable! :)
Actually that would be 6x more -- and it exists now at ISU's C6.
First, we've have a top level domain like all the other contries have had -- each with their own rules and rulers -- it's just that ours were outstandingly misguided.
However, I have little confidence that the new ones will be any better. In any event, there is no chance that <big-american-corp> is going to give up <big-american-corp>.com -- they'll just have <big-american-corp>.com.us too -- wheeee, won't that be special!
Romantically speaking, I think it's probably not a good sign if your date is putting clothes on you.
Interact, indeed!
For decades campus computing was largely ignored, but now that there's real money in it, the unblinking gaze of the bean counters is focused upon it (being the dinosaurs that they are, it will take a few years for the nerve impulses of the dotcom die off to reach such the central administrative nerve center).
The true meaning of this attention, while originally flattering, has begun to sink into the mind of the researchers, and predictably they have discovered the faustian nature of their bargain.
Actually, the birth rate in the U.S. and in much of the 'first world' is below replacement level (and in some places, is precipitously low -- Italy for one).
Population increases will continue for a couple of decades due to inertia, imigration, and lengthening lifespan, but if the trends continue, the population will decline.
Of course, this isn't all rosy news, as it means a world with many old people and few children -- in some countries the median age may well approach 60!
After all, 'free time' is basically how all the comforts of life came about in the first place! :)
<result>
<row><col name="foo">6</col>
<col name="bar">john</col></row>
...
</result>
Ok, so this immediately disqualifies any business started in the last 30 years.
And it also disqualifies any company where the startup period took less than 15 years.
And it also disqualifies any company where the rise was less sudden or less dramatic.
Is it any wonder that very few companies fit this particular mold? And is it the right mold?
And which is the better company, one that sucked for 15 years, then got the right break and performed 3x the market for 15 years, or one that say, has merely done 1.5x the market for 100 years? And which is likely to have just as sudden a decline?
As near as I can see these are all questions left unanswered...
Coming soon:
Husker QB orders pizza using 802.11a during rout!
Seriously though, I agree, just because some doofus has a <insert random e-gadget here> with them does not make it News for Nerds, blah blah, blah
Simple bash -- A phrase I'd never expect to hear!
On my system:
131072 sh
688128 bash