Re: IceBreak as an alternative to Apache?

[Niels Liisberg <liisberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

my answer in your mail... 

Den 31/12/2010 kl. 09.27 skrev Thorbjoern Ravn Andersen:

> Den 31/12/10 00.32, Kevin Turner skrev:
> > "As you know, apache/CGI has no task-switching, so basically all requests hits the same RPG program ( with a twist) - so you need to build you own kind of task switch feature into your CGI program, which also can be error prone when we talk about isolation."
> >
> > You've lost me there. What is a "task switch feature"?  I don't remember coding one of those :-)
> I believe Niels is referring to the fact that a CGI program starts 
> mostly on a clean slate every time, so you need to build up data 
> structures etc, where in icebreak the job is continuing from where it 
> left off for the previous invocation in _this session_ so you can keep 
> your state in memory.
>
> At least that's what I _think_.

Again Thorbjørn you are right; 

A request in IceBreak can be compared to pressing the enter key in good old 5250:

- All files are open 
- file pointers a left from previous request 
- and so do record lock by the way, 
- same goes for commitment control if you are using that.

All the above has to to be reinitialized in CGI

Another way to put it: IceBreak removes the nagging fact the the HTTP protocol is stateless 

The best thing about it is; we let OS/400 do all the task-switching, purging, time-slicing which has been working great for ages 

> -- 
>   Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen  "...plus... Tubular Bells!"
>
> -- 
> This is the Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries (WEB400) mailing list
> To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
> or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.