The biggest contributing factor is that web2py is executed and not import. The coder must always be sure to align objects and database in the correct order, including any auxiliary functions, class mappings, queries. He/she has to worry about the "order" of everything. Sometimes you can't have such order for complex systems. I think an import based system solves this in that the import statements declare the order instead of the physical location of the code doing that.
-- Thadeus On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Jason Brower <encomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > These are encouraging. > In large deployment I mean it in the most external sense of it. Facebook > is big, myspace is big, those kinds of object were what I was aiming for. > And with Massimo's comment about the database size. I think your right, the > framework does become less relavent. In what ways in a large codebase > making web2py code messier and is there a solution to it in another > framework? > BR, > J > > On Sat, 2010-11-13 at 11:48 -0600, Thadeus Burgess wrote: > > What is large deployment? > > Is it a large codebase that you must manage for an internal dashbaord, or > just alot of users/database io that needs to scale out for worldwide access? > > If its the first case, web2py can get really complicated in dealing with > lots of models and difficult to manage in an efficient manner. The larger > your codebase the messier web2py apps will become. In the end, this would > ultimately be up to the preferences of you and your team and what your > willing to put up with. > > In the second case, framework hardly matters at that point. Disqus uses > django, facebook uses php, reddit uses pylons, myspace uses coldfusion, > microsoft uses asp, oracle uses java. Its always the database that becomes > an issue regardless of programming language or web framework. > > -- > Thadeus > > > > > On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:53 AM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> > wrote: > > I agree with Villas. The larger the development the more the database > becomes the bottleneck and the framework irrelevant. > > Massimo > > > > On Nov 13, 8:35 am, villas <villa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Jason > > > > I guess you have to define 'large deployment' first of all. Number of > > records and size of DB? Number of concurrent users? Large data model > > or number of forms etc? Number of servers -- or replication? Global > > coverage? > > > > In principle I don't think there's any reason why Web2py would be > > worse than other frameworks. Usually it is much better! As an > > example, I think deploying to the Google App Engine should be able to > > scale sufficiently for everything but extreme cases :) > > > > If you specify more about what you wish to achieve this group may be > > able to give more specific advice how best to organise your project. > > > > -D > > > > On Nov 13, 7:12 am, Jason Brower <encomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I love web2py and it's the only framework i feel i am fully capable to > do or learn to do quickly. > > > However, I remember see that this framework is intended for small to > medium sized deployments. Is this true? What is it that stops us from larger > deployment? Should i pickup django because i may need it? > > > Regards, > > > jb > > > > > > > >
