On Aug 19, 12:48 am, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> gavino wrote:
>> 10,000 YEAH BABY! but in its defense php was talking to db etc with
>> each apache child....this 10k would be static right?
>
> The 10k are static. So when you talk to a database, you have to count how
> much memory the db takes per client, and what percentage of time the web
> serves would be talking to the db. You probably could write the performance
> critical parts of the db as a small Forth program, to reduce that load.
> Also, the dynamic content part is yet not optimized to keep the connection
> alive, this costs more Gforth starts.
>
> --
> Bernd Paysan
> "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/
unless you used a FORTH databasE!!
damit i need to spend more time on starting forth and thinking forth
gaaaa!!
j fox told me that forth can absolutely rock on modern huge ram
hardware and uartus from freenode forth chat said same....
I bet postgresql is great but that any websites a forth db could do a
lot of heavy lifting.....and if one could be made to share N
nodes....it would scael accross 2+ boxes.....
a dream of mine as a sysamin is to stop seeing %%%% of the hardware
working hard while the 95%% sit idle.....
how to make software use 2+ boxes is beyond me though
I look at stud like ruby queue so I know others are thinking along
same
lines....http://www.codeforpeople.com/lib/ruby/rq/rq-3.4.0/README
