Re: [WebDNA] v7 problem?
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2012
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 108011
interpreted = N
texte = WebDNA works great with apache. Apache is just a heavy weight, pretty = inefficient, and will not run with WebDNA on just 64MB of RAM. If you = look for speed and small footprint (RAM and CPU), apache is not the way = to go. =46rom a WebDNA perspective, apache or any other webserver is the = same. It's up to you to decide, depending on your hardware resources. I think we will move the WebDNA.fcgi config inside /WebDNA and there = will just be an "include" to add at the end of the httpd.conf, exactly = as for 6.2 Hopefully, this will help users with no clue about UNIX/LINUX - chris On Jan 9, 2012, at 14:18, Govinda wrote: > I hope you server admin guys figure all the install/config. stuff = out... because all the server config. talk makes my head spin (just = because I do not spend my time there)... and AFAICT the future of webdna = 7 currently lays in the hands of competent webdna server admins who can = sort out all the install/config issues with webdna version 7 and modern = hosting environments. ...and then the future of webdna will be back in = the hands of webdna code developers ;-) >=20 > And PLEASE don't assume we all should drop Apache. AFAIK I (amongst = others) will always want to use Apache. Just for one reason (amongst = potentially many) - I have spent a fair amount of time with a = lightweight, powerful, and beautifully-designed PHP framework called = "Code Igniter" that runs all page request through one master page, via = mod-rewrite, that lets you do really cool stuff from there.. in the = name of so many modern and incredibly useful things.. MVC, etc. If I = ever make a *major* contribution to the Webdna community, I would want = to write at least part of a solid framework like this. Immediately = someone will think of other ways to do the tiny bit I just described.. = and yeah, sure there are always more perspectives... but for now I am = just saying that let's just please not assume that we all should (or = want to) necessarily drop Apache. If Webdna becomes the cool fcgi that = only runs in one specific environment, then that kinda defeats the = purpose. >=20 > -Govinda--------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list
. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
WebDNA works great with apache. Apache is just a heavy weight, pretty = inefficient, and will not run with WebDNA on just 64MB of RAM. If you = look for speed and small footprint (RAM and CPU), apache is not the way = to go. =46rom a WebDNA perspective, apache or any other webserver is the = same. It's up to you to decide, depending on your hardware resources. I think we will move the WebDNA.fcgi config inside /WebDNA and there = will just be an "include" to add at the end of the httpd.conf, exactly = as for 6.2 Hopefully, this will help users with no clue about UNIX/LINUX - chris On Jan 9, 2012, at 14:18, Govinda wrote: > I hope you server admin guys figure all the install/config. stuff = out... because all the server config. talk makes my head spin (just = because I do not spend my time there)... and AFAICT the future of webdna = 7 currently lays in the hands of competent webdna server admins who can = sort out all the install/config issues with webdna version 7 and modern = hosting environments. ...and then the future of webdna will be back in = the hands of webdna code developers ;-) >=20 > And PLEASE don't assume we all should drop Apache. AFAIK I (amongst = others) will always want to use Apache. Just for one reason (amongst = potentially many) - I have spent a fair amount of time with a = lightweight, powerful, and beautifully-designed PHP framework called = "Code Igniter" that runs all page request through one master page, via = mod-rewrite, that lets you do really cool stuff from there.. in the = name of so many modern and incredibly useful things.. MVC, etc. If I = ever make a *major* contribution to the Webdna community, I would want = to write at least part of a solid framework like this. Immediately = someone will think of other ways to do the tiny bit I just described.. = and yeah, sure there are always more perspectives... but for now I am = just saying that let's just please not assume that we all should (or = want to) necessarily drop Apache. If Webdna becomes the cool fcgi that = only runs in one specific environment, then that kinda defeats the = purpose. >=20 > -Govinda--------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
christophe.billiottet@webdna.us
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
THANKS (1997)
WebCatalog dying in WebTen Revisited (1998)
[/application] error? (1997)
Sort Order on a page search (1997)
Why WebDNA is not popular (2002)
Re:redirect from the errorsMessages.db entry (1997)
Avery Label PDF Template (2003)
SHOWIF [var_with_backslash]^[value] (2002)
RequiredFields and MacOS X Server? (2000)
Re(7): Small Bug: ErrorLog.txt/[FORMVARIABLES]/[ORDERFILE] (1998)
Pull Down Menu for Catagories (2000)
Problems with [Applescript] (1997)
Cookies, checking if's enabled... (2004)
WebMerchant/MacAuthorize (1998)
Re2: frames & carts (1997)
Sandboxes (2004)
[Fwd: Rotating Banners ... (was LinkExchange)] (1997)
WebCat2b13MacPlugIn - [include] doesn't allow creator (1997)
Credit Card Number checking (1997)
2.0Beta Command Ref (can't find this instruction) (1997)