(Sorry folks, this is a long and rambling post...)
Hi Alex,
I suppose the vital issue for a mulit-user, server-side database is going to be
concurrency - does it look to users that they are getting the immediate attention of
the server, or are they left hanging around? Moreover, can these
Hi Bernard,
Furthermore, there is the whole issue of locking for writes to the
database. I'm not sure if the Serendipity db has any locking
mechanism.
The single-user version of SDB currently available at my ftp site
does not; the Client/Server version now being alpha tested does.
Without
Rev IPC Group
Wow! Sounds cool. Is there a URL or discussion group for this?
Alex, et al:
I should know it, as Jan made me co-moderator last December; but I
have not exercised those powers yet.
Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/revolution_ipc. If there is no
subscribe option there, I'm sure
what is the ftp address where single user copies can be found
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 10:03 AM, Rob Cozens wrote:
Hi Bernard,
Furthermore, there is the whole issue of locking for writes to the
database. I'm not sure if the Serendipity db has any locking
mechanism.
The single-user
what is the ftp address where single user copies can be found
I wish you had not asked that question, James.
I clicked on the URL I was about to post, and found that the upshot
of my ongoing (1 month, a dozen or more eMails, four phone calls, six
faxes) effort to get Network Solutions to do
Everyone,
Jan passed his thoughts on some of this to me privately. I'm posting
my response to the list because (a) I think I know him well enough
that he won't mind, and (b) to save any else the time of correcting
me regarding selecting all columns of a single record.
In our projects, we set
Hi Rob,
I did take a look on your web site a few weeks or months ago for some documentation on
SDB. I didn't find it, and guessed that you thought that anyone who was really
interested would take a look at the code, since you kindly make it available for us to
read. Sorry, I was too lazy,
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 06:13 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(Sorry folks, this is a long and rambling post...)
Bernard, you are raising lots of interesting issues but I disagree with
you about some of technical possibilities.
- Very high performance servers can be constructed in a
Bernard, et al:
I did take a look on your web site a few weeks or months ago for
some documentation on SDB. I didn't find it,
No, it, like the page in my signature below, is not linked to the
main website. That's a spare time project, as the website is meant
to promote OenoLog and there is
Hi [EMAIL PROTECTED],
IIRC, the altBrowser is IE only?
No, you can also set it up to use Mozilla/NetScape, if installed!
I would not like to rely on Microsoft for anything. They have a
history of destroying competition (by fair means or foul).
And it is my belief that we have seen nothing yet:
Recently, Rob Cozens wrote:
I clicked on the URL I was about to post, and found that the upshot
of my ongoing (1 month, a dozen or more eMails, four phone calls, six
faxes) effort to get Network Solutions to do what they needed to do
so my new domain registry could handle my domain renewal,
I would not like to rely on Microsoft for anything. They have a
history of destroying competition (by fair means or foul).
And it is my belief that we have seen nothing yet: they are
going to tighten their monopoly position in ways that many
people have not yet imagined.
Unless others follow
Suggestion: blow off Network Solutions.
Believe me, Scott, that's been the goal of my whole frustrating exchange.
If Network Solution was in charge of the President's security, not
only would it have been impossible for an unidentified person to get
on the press plane in Africa; the Chief of
Hi Alex,
Thanks for the comments. It is helping me to think things through.
I do not think people should be prevented from using Rev on the server
side, for lack of documentation or supporting.
I agree. I too wish that the documentation on CGI programming with Rev was more
pronounced.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Alex Rice wrote:
I asked what Runrev's plans for XML were, and pointed out that it seemed to be a bit unclear as to the purpose of including XML functionality in the latest version.
Huh? Maybe I don't understand the question. Obviously the purpose was to have an XML parser.
Mark Brownell wrote:
With regard to XML ... It is cool to have an XML parser in Rev. But the
potential is vast, and I hope to see some sign that Runrev have a strategic
direction with this. For example, it would be nice for them to integrate
version control from within Rev. This surely
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 01:11 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Mark Brownell wrote:
With regard to XML ... It is cool to have an XML parser in Rev. But
the
potential is vast, and I hope to see some sign that Runrev have a
strategic
direction with this. For example, it would be nice for them
On Saturday, July 12, 2003, at 02:11 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Couldn't you diff the binaries?
Diff-ing binaries doesn't give any useful information, in any tool that
I'm aware of.
(On OS X)
# diff FacCalc1.rev FacCalc2.rev
Binary files FacCalc1.rev and FacCalc2.rev differ
Am I
I've used Revolution to create apps on the Mac, but I've not tried any server-related features of Revolution - - - can anyone tell me if Revolution could be used to create an app that runs on a Mac OS X server that pulls in data off of fields on a web-page served by the Mac OS X server performs
On Friday, July 11, 2003, at 01:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've used Revolution to create apps on the Mac, but I've not tried any
server-related features of Revolution - - - can anyone tell me if
Revolution could be used to create an app that runs on a Mac OS X
server that pulls in data
On Friday, July 11, 2003, at 03:54 PM, Bill Vlahos wrote:
I think Rev could make a pretty good server. The only example I'm
aware of is Tuviah' chat software at the RunRev user contributed page.
I'd like to see a simple generalized example of a Rev web server app
designed for forms. I've done
On Friday, July 11, 2003, at 04:39 PM, Rob Cozens wrote:
Rev IPC Group
Wow! Sounds cool. Is there a URL or discussion group for this?
Alex Rice, Software Developer
Architectural Research Consultants, Inc.
http://ARCplanning.com
___
use-revolution
Hi Alex,
I think that any of the xTalk/Hypercard-based models already have much of what is
offered by ZODB. The Zope object database is just a way of saving in-memory objects
to a persistent data store. As I understand it (in principle), ZODB is just an
database for objects, written in
On Friday, July 11, 2003, at 08:06 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To me the xTalk way is far more acceptable (and I prefer xTalk to
Python). For me it is much easier to get a grasp of fields, cards and
stacks than the objects that get packed away into the ZODB...
Bernard, glad someone else is
24 matches
Mail list logo
