On 2/6/2013 9:26 AM, Jeffrey Janner wrote:
IMO, developer performance trumps runtime performance most of the time.
>So, if you can create a more maintainable system in less time by using
>EJB (or whatever), then you go ahead and do it: servers are cheap,
>while developer time is expensive.
>
>- -chris
Chris, I'd like to differ with you on this last point.
As someone who's been a developer, support person, and admin, I've got a pretty
good perspective on this subject.
While servers may be cheap, they will never be cheap enough to overcome poor programming
practices. I've worked with systems so poorly designed that we couldn't purchase a system
big enough to run the software adequately, once you got above a handful of users. Yes,
it's gotten to the point where systems are much cheaper than they used to be, while
developer salaries are only increasing (supposedly), so wasting time on some minor
performance improvement may not be cost-effective. However, when you aggregate the time
that hundreds of users spend waiting on a response from a poorly designed, unresponsive
system, I think you'll find that it trumps the cost of having the developer spending a
few extra minutes to "get it right the first time".
Generalized solutions, I think, include a substantial amount of code
that isn't required for a given application. The additional code
affects performance but with the speed, availability and low cost of
hardware, people seem to be opting for packaged solutions that don't
require their programmers to understand the details of the
implementation. That seems short-sighted to me.
As an aside, I wonder if, at some point, the energy costs of inefficient
code will come into play. Don't wasted CPU cycles == wasted energy?
-Terence Bandoian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
