W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-jigsaw@w3.org > January to February 1999

Re: 2 questions

From: David Kershaw <dkershaw@whoi.edu>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 13:24:31 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <002901be5dc6$7a42ab90$0a0a0a0a@suzhou>
To: <www-jigsaw@w3.org>
Hi Mike.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Engelhart <aengelhart@austin.rr.com>
To: Jigsaw Mailing List <www-jigsaw@w3.org>
Date: Sunday, February 21, 1999 10:18 AM
Subject: 2 questions


>1)  Does anyone have any comparison data of using Jigsaw for running mision
>critical servlets vs. running apache with an out of process servlet engine
>like ServletExec.

I host projects done with a servlet application framework on Jigsaw by
preference.  However, for some projects I've been asked to use SGIs running
Netscape Enterprise Server.  For those I use JRun (in the past I've also
used Servlet Express on NT for similar jobs).  I don't have any hard
comparison data, sorry.

I prefer Jigsaw to out of process servlet runners to keep things simple at
no serious performance cost.  Despite the documentation (of 7 months ago
when I started with Jigsaw), setup seems easier than for JRun on UNIX or
ServletExpress on NT.  Also I feel I have more flexibility in a few areas
(platform, configuration, source-code hacking) and I notice some
side-effects that I find personally helpful (for instance POST to an SSI
page with servlet calls seems to be mildly different under Jigsaw vis-a-vis
JRun, probably due to tighter integration--but don't quote me on this ;-).

Still, it all depends on what you are doing.


>I have been using ServletExec for a months now in "lite"
>mode and like it a lot, but it's also $395.00 to upgrade so I can use all
>it's features.  I was wondering if anyone can comment on the stability of
>Jigsaw in comparison.  I've found SE and Apache to be a very stable combo
so
>far.   PCWeek's article while praising Jigsaw also made it sound like it's
>just something to experiment with rather than to deploy a real external web
>site with?? Comments?


I've worked in a Very Big Company--PCWeek's audience--and in a Serious
Research Place.  Both do critical stuff with technology, but the guys in
white coats have more confidence that things can be made to work so they're
more flexible about technology.

On the other hand, Jigsaw is a heck of a lot more stable than some late
generation MS software I've seen in the corporate environment.  ;-)

I've seen no show-stopping problems to date and the Jigsaw team is very
responsive so I'd say go for it.



David
Received on Sunday, 21 February 1999 13:31:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 9 April 2012 12:13:28 GMT