?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Conclusion - brad's life — LiveJournal [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Brad Fitzpatrick

[ website | bradfitz.com ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Conclusion [Oct. 20th, 2000|01:36 am]
Brad Fitzpatrick
[Tags|, ]

After doing a lot of research and playing around, I think I've decided to use mod_perl for the middleware layer (the protocol handler) and use PHP for the web crap... and just write some PHP functions that'll interface with the middleware. Sure, it'll be an extra socket open (currently the Perl code in BML calls the protocol handler directly) but I have to do it eventually when the middleware runs on its own heavy-duty box (dual P3-933, shitload of memory) and there's a farm of stupid web servers (not yet, but later). Yeah, the more I think about this the more I like it. I'll probably abstract the protocol handler while I'm at it and make it return a tree internally to a output engine that can format the response as XML (for XML-RPC, or people doing XSL), or the current "log.cgi" text file output format.
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: jimmiebeeee
2000-10-20 01:51 am (UTC)

That's easy for you to say ...

Yeah but will all of this, uh, stuff mix up a really cool chocolate milkshake better than Dick's?

Will it make my clothes cleaner and brighter?

And will it make my LiveJournal go faster and my brain think of more things to write in my journal?

Glad you understand it. Thanks for creating LJ and helping me unleash the writer within, but I had better stop now, it is past my going home time and I was going to leave 90 minutes ago, good

night.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mattrope
2000-10-20 08:33 am (UTC)

perl, modperl

What's the advantage of using modperl (through a webserver) instead of a standalone daemon written in perl for the middleware layer?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bradfitz
2000-10-20 11:33 am (UTC)

Re: perl, modperl

Because for this type of daemon Apache is the ideal framework to build from... I already use HTTP for my protocol handler and it works well. Libraries are available for everything to do HTTP.... so if I wrote my own I'd have to write my own mini HTTP server (or force client authors to adopt a new protocol)... plus I'd have to handle pre-forking (or better, multi-threading, which Apache 2.0 provides), and logging, and access control, run-time statistics....

All this stuff Apache provides. Why reinvent the wheel?

Another fun project I want to take up is writing a LiveJournal client/environment in XUL.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: itchi
2000-10-24 07:33 pm (UTC)

Re: perl, modperl

I've been wondering about this comment for about a week now. I've heard alot of supporting remarks here and there that apache is a hog. If all of the clients traffic is 'proxying' through apache wouldn't this be a huge bottleneck?

I'm also kind of curious on the stats of posts to reads. If there are more reads through a web broswer then my point is moot. But if there were more posts through the clients, some sort of fast daemon would be the best, no? This would of course mean more work but how hard would it be?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)