Re: IceBreak as an alternative to Apache?

[Thorbjoern Ravn Andersen <ravn@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Den 30/12/10 22.30, Niels Liisberg skrev:
> Hi Thorbjørn;
>
> There is nothing wrong with apache!! it is a fantastic web-server... The problem is the CGI part and fact that apache is well suited for running thread where you in RPG normally would like to have a process - namely a IBMI job.  So typical you have to (re) design you app to relocate resources whenever you have a new request from the "next" session. Which again makes i.e. commitment control almost impossible - or at least a nightmare..
>
> Some have implemented persistence in CGI ( now we are only talking ILE/RPG/COBLE - and down that road) however, that just adds to the CGI overhead.
>
> So the 10-factor holds in IceBreak. It is, however,  more in the manner - 10 times less resources is needed due to the added unnecessary stuff applied to your code and due to the number of layers.
Hi Niels.

I am not doubting your figures.  I just try to understand how it happens.

Sorry for not understanding this immediately, but I am not very familiar 
with how the non-Java things work on the i.  Does this mean that you map 
each session to its own IBM i job, and let it keep state from invocation 
to make it very fast to handle each response?  And said job is then 
finished when the session expires?

But I do not understand what you mean by "commitment control".  Could 
you elaborate?