×
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.
" And, if node on the IBM i does not perform better than CGI under conditions of very high concurrency, then that may become an argument for running node on servers other than IBM i."
You're assuming that Node runs better on other servers that IBMi. I haven't seen any benchmarks, so I can't say.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly Cookson [mailto:KCookson@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 9:36 AM
To: Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [WEB400] [EXTERNAL] Re: ibm_db node module and IBM Data Server Driver
Okay, that’s fair. Not pointless.
Yet, if you can get equally good performance from CGIDEV2 and COBOL, or from XMLSERVICE wrappers and CGI, then why would RPG or COBOL developers want to go through the hassle of learning asynchronous programming with JavaScript and node? What do they gain from using node?
And, if node on the IBM i does not perform better than CGI under conditions of very high concurrency, then that may become an argument for running node on servers other than IBM i.
That’s the sentiment behind my statement. I was wrong to say it was pointless. But the attraction of node to many large companies is its performance under conditions of very high concurrency. These companies could have chosen CGI options. They didn’t. They chose node. If the performance potential of node on the IBM i has been reduced to being the same as CGI, that really undercuts what many companies are looking for in node.
Thanks,
Kelly Cookson
IT Project Leader
Dot Foods, Inc.
217-773-4486 ext. 12676
www.dotfoods.com<
http://www.dotfoods.com>
midrange.com
