[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> w> Of course, most of this seems to be well beyond the current
> w> capabilities of Rebol (as it stands right now). I think it'll
>
> Actually, you would be surprised in knowing what REBOL can really
> do here. :-) You can get a modular web server in less than 30Kb of
> code.
>
Yes, plus 200 Kb of REBOL itself :-)
> w> files, and spit back the output of those scripts - but w/o
> w> multi-threading, it's performance under any load will be poor.
>
> It will if your server needs to handle a lot of requests at the
> same time; there are a lot of situations when this is unlikely. A
> solution could be to create a number of REBOL processes and
> distribute the load over them.
>
or just wait for REBOL/Command to launch another instance of REBOL
itself :-) Well, a little bit inefficient in comparison to threading, as
whole REBOL interpreter will be loaded into memory once again. But
doesn't Apache use separate processes in opposite to threads of IIS
anyway?
btw: as you can see from Sterling's proxy example (IIRC), you can serve
various requests "simultaneously", simply switching from one connection
to another in loop ...
> OTOH, since REBOL/Apache (the REBOL module for Apache servers) is
> already in beta stage, I'd prefer waiting for it.
>
But that's another story. I like simple REBOL webserver for testing
purposes. I have everything placed on one diskette, webserver in REBOL,
proxy in REBOL, it just rocks :-)
-pekr-
>
> Regards,
> Gabriele.
> --
> o--------------------) .-^-. (----------------------------------o
> | Gabriele Santilli / /_/_\_\ \ Amiga Group Italia --- L'Aquila |
> | GIESSE on IRC \ \-\_/-/ / http://www.amyresource.it/AGI/ |
> o--------------------) `-v-' (----------------------------------o
