Re: IceBreak as an alternative to Apache? -- WEB400

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Den 31/12/10 00.12, Niels Liisberg skrev:

Yep !! and this is the core problem. Now - icebreak starts one process for each session - and keeps it; now successive request for any request in that particular browser session it the routed to that process. This vital - no process invocation is required for each browser-TCP/IP disconnect

I am aware that having one process for each session gives good performance, but it nags me a bit about large workloads and you've triggered my curiosity. Do you have any scalability numbers on iceBreak? What is the maximum number of concurrent users that this design can handle (does it hit a "you cannot have any more processes, sorry" error message eventually, or is it other factors that show?). Also what is the raw speed in terms of requests per second and other I/O? What is the largest network pipe you can saturate and with what hardware?

It is interesting to use to compare our Java based solution to this. And yes, Java is larger and - perhaps - slower, but for those things we do, I need the full Java technology stack in the web server :)

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.