-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 You do not need root access unless you need to run on a privileged port (ie. under 1024). You can install your Java app server of choice with FDS in any folder you want.
FDS Express is only restricted by it's license. For instance the license states that you can only run FDS Express on a single cpu machine. And that you can't redistribute FDS Express. - -James Michael Schmalle wrote: > Hey Hank, > > Using FDS also means that you have root access to the web server right? > Seeing as this is Java, you would need permissions to install in root > folders. > > So, even if you can use FDS Express, it is still restricted(not free in the > sense of Flex SDK). Dedicated servers are not cheap. > > Peace, Mike > > On 8/24/06, hank williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Oh, Sorry Jack, I didnt understand that you were asking a licensing >> question. >> >> Regards, >> Hank >> >> On 8/24/06, Jack Caldwell < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Hank: >> > >> > Not a problem. >> > >> > I agree overall the web app has a bearing. >> > >> > However, I just wanted to know how many concurrent users FDS Express >> > would allow. >> > >> > Also, with the developmental version what happens when concurrent user >> > number 101 comes knocking on the door. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Jack >> > >> > ------------------------------ >> > *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On >> > Behalf Of *hank williams >> > *Sent:* Thursday, August 24, 2006 2:31 PM >> > *To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com >> > >> > *Subject:* Re: [Junk E-Mail - LOW] [flexcoders] Re: Choice of backend >> > systems - which provides >> > >> > Hate to jump in, because I see your question is targeted at ted, but I >> > have to say one thing. The issue isnt how many users FDS Express can >> support >> > but how many users your entire application can support per server. >> Because >> > FDS is just a piece of your web application (WAR). So if you are doing >> > something that is computationally intense or disk access intense it >> will >> > suck up system resources more than otherwise, thus reducing the >> number of >> > concurrent users your FDS app can support. So you really need to >> test your >> > app to see how many concurrent users your apps, without FDS, will >> support. >> > Adding FDS to that will obviously consume resources as well. >> > >> > What this means is FDS is more expensive when attached to a more >> "heavy" >> > application. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Hank >> > >> > On 8/24/06, Jack Caldwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > > Ted: >> > > >> > > How many concurrent users can FDS Express support? >> > > >> > > On the departmental version, if the 101st concurrent user tries to >> > > connect is there an >> > > error message or busy message or do they just wait a little longer to >> > > get the data? >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > >> > > Jack >> > > >> > > ------------------------------ >> > > *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > *On Behalf Of *Ted Patrick >> > > *Sent:* Thursday, August 24, 2006 1:57 PM >> > > *To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com >> > > *Subject:* RE: [Junk E-Mail - LOW] [flexcoders] Re: Choice of backend >> > > systems - which provides >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > FDS Express == 1CPU FREE >> > > >> > > - FDS Express is limited to one 1 physical CPU (multi-core supported) >> > > >> > > - FDS Express cannot be clustered for failover and redundancy. >> > > >> > > All higher level FDS Licenses address the redundancy and failover >> > > aspects for departmental use (100 concurrent users) and enterprise >> > > (unlimited users). >> > > >> > > The blanket statement that FDS costs $20,000 is dead wrong. For a >> > > large majority of projects it is free, free, free. >> > > >> > > Ted Patrick >> > > >> > > Flex Evangelist >> > > >> > > Adobe Systems Incorporated >> > > >> > > ------------------------------ >> > > >> > > *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> ups.com] >> > > *On Behalf Of *hank williams >> > > >> > > *Sent:* Thursday, August 24, 2006 11:19 AM >> > > *To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com >> > > * Subject:* Re: [Junk E-Mail - LOW] [flexcoders] Re: Choice of >> backend >> > > systems - which provides >> > > >> > > I have to agree with Ted regarding productivity. >> > > >> > > Of course I may just be revealing that I am not as smart as the rest >> > > of you, but when I was considering various means of connecting to >> my java >> > > server during the transition to Flex2, I explored Axis and Axis2 >> for web >> > > services. >> > > >> > > Figuring out how to use them was *no joke*. I am sure if I had >> > > dedicated the time to it I could have gotten up and running. But, >> honestly, >> > > I gave up after several days of study. >> > > >> > > The Axis umailing list was fairly useless for beginners, there were >> > > lots of people having problems with Axis2 and the documentation >> was almost >> > > unbearable. Now if you are already an expert then none of this >> applies to >> > > you. But the idea that from flash that you can just call your >> server side >> > > code just by declaring the classes you are working with in a >> configuration >> > > file is magic. It is so easy. Of course the typing issues on web >> services >> > > sound like a bear too and there are none with remoting, but I cant >> really >> > > talk about that because I never got that far with web services. >> > > >> > > FDS and Flex2 are far far easier to work with. My only problem with >> > > FDS is pricing. Remoting used to cost $1000 or so per server, or >> it was free >> > > if you used an open source solution. Now it costs $20,000 per >> server after >> > > you need more than one server. I may actually have to switch back >> to an AMF0 >> > > version of remoting by the time my first server is overwhelmed >> because $20k >> > > is insane. I am using amazon S3 and for 20k worth of bandwidth and >> storage I >> > > could support millions of users over a year. but 20k in FDS software >> > > probably only supports 100k users. So the economics of FDS are >> insane. They >> > > are probably driven by the desire not to screw the Flex 1.5 people >> who >> > > paid a lot of money for their servers. Nevertheless, for remoting >> only apps >> > > FDS pricing is the only reason not to use it. But technically if >> you dont >> > > have to learn web services FDS will save you a lot of time. >> > > >> > > Regards, >> > > Hank >> > > >> > > On 8/23/06, *Ted Patrick* < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > > >> > > AMF is faster in 3 fundamental ways: >> > > >> > > >> > > 1. Bandwidth Size ? Smaller, lighter, faster!!! >> > > >> > > >> > > 1. Parsing Speed ? Less work on both client and server!!! >> > > >> > > >> > > 1. Developer Productivity ? Less work for developers!!! >> > > >> > > Web Services are dependent on XML Parsing on both the client and >> > > server side. Although it's a good story, XML parsers are not very >> efficient >> > > as parsing documents is an interpreted process. The Flash Player >> XML parser >> > > will always be dramatically slower than AMF parsing, binary >> formats are >> > > notoriously faster in this regard. >> > > >> > > XML parsing additionally decays rapidly as the file size increases. >> > > Flash Player XML parsing time increase non-linearly with larger XML >> > > documents. With AMF parsing times are linear with data size. The >> XML decay >> > > can be attributed to the number of inner objects that need to be >> created >> > > during a parsing run. AMF objects are 1:1 with the data received >> where XML >> > > data is 1:N per Elements/Attribute. >> > > >> > > Comparing XML to AMF is an unfair race, AMF wins every time. When you >> > > add in the overhead of WS SOAP parsing atop the base XML parser >> speed you >> > > begin to see performance issues. With SOAP, you interpret an XML >> document >> > > back into typed objects depending on the SOAP specifics used. Sure >> 350ms is >> > > ok once or twice, but try doing 200 transactions in this format >> and you will >> > > see performance issues arise. Using Web Services you are forcing >> the Flash >> > > Player to do allot of unneeded work. The goal is to build richer >> > > applications, not burn up player performance in crud operations. >> > > >> > > Additionally non-proxied Web Service use suffers with Flash Player >> > > because of the browser variation in the plug-in APIS. You cannot >> get the 500 >> > > Errors response content in IE and thus the SOAP fault standard >> breaks down. >> > > In SOAP there are important messages that arrive with 500 Errors >> and the >> > > inability of the Flash Player to receive these is a problem. >> Unfortunately >> > > there is no seamless way to get 500 Errors into the Flash Player >> other then >> > > rewriting an HTTP Client in the Socket class. This effort would >> also require >> > > a new SOAP library within Flex and socket use on low ports >> requires a more >> > > complex crossdomain.xml configuration. Even then you still suffer the >> > > same performance issues. >> > > >> > > Performance aside, the productivity discussion is much more >> important. >> > > AMF3 and Flex Data Services are wildly productive. Once you >> compile your >> > > Java Class and configure a destination in FDS (1 XML Element), you >> are done. >> > > All typing is handled, All methods are ready to run with any >> number of >> > > client applications. It is the easiest way to create a server side >> API that >> > > I know of. Actually most cases, implementing FDS will removes >> $20,000 of >> > > developer time wasted on implementing other data exchange for an >> > > application. FDS value is easy to see when viewed through this >> productivity >> > > ROI metric. If you add CF integration into FDS, you enjoy an even >> more >> > > productive jump. We spend so much time talking about performance >> but we >> > > often waste so much developer time doing mundane data exchange >> when things >> > > could be automated. >> > > >> > > Having worked at Cynergy Systems, everyone needs to realize that >> > > Carson, Dave and Team are industry leading professionals at Web >> Services. >> > > They know SOAP better than any single consulting firm that I know >> of. These >> > > guys were on teams at Sybase and Microsoft building the first >> generation of >> > > Web Services integration servers (MS BizTalk, EAServer)!!! They >> have the >> > > expertise to make Web Services/JAVA work seamlessly with Flex but >> this is >> > > out of reach for most (unless you hire them). They can jump >> through flaming >> > > hoops that few developers can with the FLEX / TOMCAT / AXIS / JAVA >> stack. >> > > They have been down a very hard road and have learning all the >> tricks to >> > > making this stack work very well for their clients. Looking back >> and knowing >> > > what I know now about Flex Data Services much of this hard work >> could have >> > > been dramatically simplified and automated (but then again Flex >> 2/FDS hadn't >> > > shipped yet?). FDS makes all this hard work evaporate and makes >> easy for >> > > anyone to exchange data like an industry leading professional. >> > > >> > > The really funny part is that we are only talking about the RPC >> > > portions of Flex Data Services. Messaging and Data Management are >> really >> > > valuable features to understand and explore. These two features >> are 70% of >> > > the FDS product. We(Adobe) need to do a better job of making this >> value >> > > crystal clear. >> > > >> > > Flex Data Services is the most productive and high performance way to >> > > exchange data with the Flash Player. Period, Hands Down, Next! >> > > >> > > My 2 cents, >> > > >> > > Ted Patrick >> > > >> > > Flex Evangelist >> > > >> > > Adobe Systems Incorporated >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE7mOlsZ9+wiQzdmARArVPAJ95p0JswdGTT/F+CernTXCJ1V5J8gCgwcwY 3oIM2I3pPZHcwkyajqY34KQ= =cdKq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
