World: r3wp
[!Cheyenne] Discussions about the Cheyenne Web Server
older newer | first last |
Terry 25-Jan-2010 [7654] | the read/write is fine.. I think it might be Cheyenne's dishing up of .ogg files.. ? |
Graham 25-Jan-2010 [7655] | couldn't try it ..your server was offline |
Terry 25-Jan-2010 [7656] | hmm.. maybe Chrome |
Dockimbel 26-Jan-2010 [7657] | Cheyenne has nothing against .ogg files. Are you removing ogg files once sent? |
Pekr 26-Jan-2010 [7658] | If Cheyenne would refuse .ogg files, then it would belong to Belief Systems :-) |
Terry 26-Jan-2010 [7659x5] | ok.. did some tests.. it's Chrome. |
Try this with FF and Chrome http://shinyrockets.com/delme.html | |
(running on Apache) | |
although i did add the ogg to Cheyenne mime-types | |
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=33139 | |
Janko 28-Jan-2010 [7664x2] | huh, I have to comment something.. I went looking what curecode looks like .. and founc this one http://curecode.org/rebol3/view-tickets.rsp .. when I am clicking links the page reloaded so quickly that I couldn't determine if you are doing an ayax call or the whole page is reloading and I can't see it.. I also noticed this on my cheyenne projects. I don't get how you managed to do this. There are numerous servers outthere and rebol is not the fastest language and I haven't seen something like that anywhere?!?!? I mean I think also the static pages that you load from some webserver take some more time.. ? |
I don't believe that cheyenne can be **THAT** much faster so that it's so visibly obvous. Do you send the page in some specific way? | |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7666x3] | :-) |
No AJAX calls, nor other tricks. It's very fast for several reasons : - almost no images. - no JS lib to load and no JS code to execute when page is loaded. - server is far from being overloaded. - MySQL backend is very fast for read accesses (MySQL has a very efficient caching system for queries). - Cheyenne RSP engine *is* fast (RSP scripts are compiled to REBOL code and generated code is cached in memory) | |
The result is so fast that it looks like a RIA application, you hardly notice the redraw delay. | |
Janko 28-Jan-2010 [7669x3] | yes, I was intentionally looking but I couldn't see it-.. I had to select the header to see if selection will disappear |
hm.. maybe it's the combination of vary fast app server with everything in ram and caching and also unbloated web development which rebol programmers maybe practice more than the regular webdevs | |
yes, with curecode I also had to account the fact that it's querying the database and it's still so fast.. anyway .. it's very good feeling to have responsive webapps | |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7672] | I agree that the application design counts also, being bloat-free helps a lot. |
Janko 28-Jan-2010 [7673x3] | my cebelca,biz app is also quite big and "fancy" and uses only 1 14x14 image file (icon for filters) :) .. |
curecode is also visually full while very clear and clean | |
but it's not only that, I made apps like this in php and python before but they still loaded normally .. the fast loading in my cheyenne apps vas also noticed by others with comments "how come it's loading THAT fast" ? .. I just said "wasn't me :)" | |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7676] | I wonder how far this kind of approach can be used instead of JS-based RIA. |
Janko 28-Jan-2010 [7677] | well JS still gives you interactiviry on the client level which would be hard to fully duplicate with the server (overlays, popin div-s ...) |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7678x2] | I must admit that, a few years ago, I was the first surprized when I put only my first RSP scripts, even more when I added db queries... |
only=>online | |
Janko 28-Jan-2010 [7680x2] | cebelca.bit iz 90% rendered by the javascript on the client side .. |
but with or without that fast server is much much better than slow | |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7682] | Right, a lot of UI effects are easier to implement in JS rather than generated server-side. |
Janko 28-Jan-2010 [7683] | I will send you one DM :) |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7684] | hehe, thanks :-) |
Graham 28-Jan-2010 [7685] | Is there anything stopping a R3 uniserve and cheyenne? |
Pekr 28-Jan-2010 [7686x2] | yes, the lack of non-finished tasking model |
I think that Doc is not willing to port it to r3, unless threading can be used ... | |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7688] | Did R3 reached beta? |
Henrik 28-Jan-2010 [7689] | nope |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7690] | Ok nice, so I don't have to list all the other requirements. ;-) |
Terry 28-Jan-2010 [7691x2] | MySQL has a very efficient caching system for queries are you using mysql query cache? |
i was wondering the other day about memcache and Cheyenne | |
Graham 28-Jan-2010 [7693] | I was thinking more of functional limitations ... |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7694] | That's the "other requirements" part... |
Pekr 28-Jan-2010 [7695] | Doc - so if we place BETA sticker on current R3 alpha, will you port Cheyenne to it, even if threading will be missing? :-) |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7696] | are you using mysql query cache? It's transparent for the user, MySQL is caching by default. |
Terry 28-Jan-2010 [7697] | yeah, but you need to set it up in my.ini, right? |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7698x3] | Pekr: it's more than just a word ;-) |
Terry: I've never setup anything wrt caching in MySQL. | |
The only thing I touch in %my.cnf is skip-networking (when uncommented) and skip-innodb (when commented). | |
Graham 28-Jan-2010 [7701] | So, the question is, what are the functional limitations in r3alpha that is preventing a port ? |
Dockimbel 28-Jan-2010 [7702x2] | Probably the most impacting one is missing /Library. |
Also, I'm not sure if CALL is usable in R3. | |
older newer | first last |