Re: [TCLUG:12613] Reasons not to use Apache?

["Eric M. Hopper" <hopper@omnifarious.mn.org>]

On Thu, Jan 20, 2000 at 01:29:50PM -0600, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> I'm going to be creating some new client and server software at work
> to handle administration of an extensive multi-level hierarchy of
> things.  (I would say "objects", but they're not objects in the OOP
> sense.)  These things are scattered across... oh... I'd say about 8
> XBase-style database tables.
> 
> A previous programmer planted the idea in my boss's head that writing
> an Apache module to do this would be a good and readily portable way
> of handling it.  I disagree and think that it would be much better to
> create a separate standalone server to handle these functions.
> Philosophically, I believe that this would be the way to go because I
> favor the *nix 'lots of little pieces that each do one thing very well
> and can be readily combined with each other to handle bigger tasks'
> approach.  Practically, running this through a general-purpose web
> server and HTTP connections is sure to add a _lot_ of overhead.
> Additionally, the management functions are much better suited to a
> connection-based protocol than a connectionless one.
> 
> Anyhow, I mentioned on Tuesday that I'd written up a first draft of a
> protocol to handle this.  Now my boss wants to have an extensive
> meeting tomorrow morning to go over my "propsed API" and make sure I'm
> "headed in the right direction".
> 
> Aside from overhead issues (bosses are not widely known for being
> swayed by philosophy), what other reasons can I give for not doing
> this in Apache?  The two reasons he's mentioned for favoring Apache
> that I can't readily counter are availablilty of load-balancing
> options other than round-robin DNS entries (I'm sure they're out
> there, but I don't know of any) and a desire to minimize the number of
> processes running on each machine (which is, essentially, a
> philosophical matter).
> 
> Or is he right and it would be best to just roll everything into the
> web software?

	What are you going to be doing to this multilevel hierarchy from
the client?  Also, what can you do to make the decision easy to change
later if you or your boss turns out to be right?

	It's painful to create user interfaces.  Browsers have done a
lot of the hard work for you.  Making your server browser accessible
makes it easier to write a client, because, largely, you don't have to.

Thos are my thoughts,
-- 
Its name is Public Opinion.  It is held in reverence. It settles everything.
Some think it is the voice of God.  Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet
broke a chain or freed a human soul.     ---Mark Twain
-- Eric Hopper (hopper@omnifarious.mn.org  http://omnifarious.mn.org/~hopper) --

PGP signature