KCLUG

kclug@kclug.org

3239 discussions

RE: Test Hosting Recommendation
by Brian Densmore 17 Feb '05

17 Feb '05

> From: Jason Clinton > > ...Actually I believe it comes from LISP or possibly Smalltalk > or its predecessor Simula. Well, I wasn't trying to give the full history of function overloading. I was merely pointing to the source of function overloading for .Net. LISP by it's very design is overloadable. However you might be able to argue that FORTRAN also was able to overload functions, and since FORTRAN predates LISP... (however don't let McCarthy hear you say that) > -----Original Message----- > From: Gerald Combs > > Next you'll be telling us that there were personal computers > before the > IBM PC. Sheesh. Yes! I believe the proper term for it is "brain". Of course it's not a "binary personal computer", and it doesn't always come with sound or a monitor, but the great thing about it, is you never need to reboot, add memory or replace the harddrive. Once the memory or storage system goes or it shuts down it's game over. Of course scientists are working on replacing or enhancing memory and storage abilities and on extending the effective lifetime of brains. Then of course there's the Babcock personal computer, there for anyone who wants to build one. "No one will ever need more than 1 computer." - Thomas Watson

3 2

RE: PHP versus ASP.NET WAS: Test Hosting Recommendation
by Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) 17 Feb '05

17 Feb '05

>Be careful there, it is my understanding that C# is compiled to bytecode. >This is like calling java a compiled language. When I think compiled, I >think c, Pascal, COBOL, assembly, etc. Compiling to bytecode certainly has >advantages, but it is still interpreted. The nice thing about compiling to >byte code is being able to transfer "compiled" code across platforms. You >still need to have interpreters compiled to the machine code for every >platform. Ok, you got me there :) Although another nice thing about compiling is that instead of having 50+ files to distribute, you have one "compiled" library (or assembly, whichever you prefer).

1 0

RE: Server Crashing Question
by Brian Kelsay 17 Feb '05

17 Feb '05

Josh, when troubleshooting a desktop or server the process usually starts the same. For future reference: What were you doing when it broke/crashed/stalled? What was the last change made to the machine? What else is on the machine and was integration testing done (do all the apps play nice together)? Do you have a backup you can roll back to and test? Can you recreate the problem? Can WE recreate the problem? Is the software or hardware being used as intended? Is it supposed to do what it is doing, other than crashing of course? What are the min. hardware requirements of the software and are those realistic? There are other things that get asked from there as you work the problem, but those are the basics. Logs help, a server should have a changelog to refer to, and those changes should go thru a change control meeting and approval process if your organization is more than a handful of IT people. Discuss how a change may affect users, plan for down time for big changes and migrations, etc. So if you have a notebook for each server then great!! If not, why not? So the server or the app was maybe not tested under load. There are programs and scripts that will simulate loads so you can test this on a box in your off-line test lab. You have a lab don't you? Brian Kelsay >>> "Charles, Joshua Micah " <> 02/17/05 09:13AM >>> Thanks to everyone that replied, both on and off the list. I think we've decided that the server just had too many users.

1 0

RE: Server Crashing Question
by Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) 17 Feb '05

17 Feb '05

Thanks to everyone that replied, both on and off the list. I think we've decided that the server just had too many users. Thanks! Josh -----Original Message----- From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Turner Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 8:19 PM To: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Re: Server Crashing Question On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 08:09:36AM -0600, Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) wrote: > What I'm looking for is the opinion of someone with more experience > administering servers. Is traffic the most likely cause of the > problem? How about logs? I had an issue with PHP and Drupal's modules page. I could never get it to open. I finally checked the logs and had to increase memory usage to 64M, rather than the 8M default. Anywho, logs would be a good place to start. Is your PHP app a db-intensive or CPU/RAM-intensive project? Jeremy _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug(a)kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug

1 0

RE: PHP versus ASP.NET WAS: Test Hosting Recommendation
by Brian Densmore 16 Feb '05

16 Feb '05

One more thing. I am all for using mono to embrace .Net and c#. I believe we should take this opportunity to "embrace and extend" .net and c#. We should add features to .net and to c# to make it better, faster and more useful for the world at large. We should make these features available via GPL. What better way to take away Microsoft market share than by using their own tactics against them. Plus if we add features we can be sure they really do work in cross-browser/platforms, and they are the features that we really want and are useful.

1 0

RE: PHP versus ASP.NET WAS: Test Hosting Recommendation
by Brian Densmore 16 Feb '05

16 Feb '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) > > ... of the two I've seen more professional C# code than I > have PHP. I should probably take a look at these two projects and see > if there are any organizations tricks I can pickup from them. Well this would make sense since there are likely many many more people coding for Windows than Linux and PHP is probably more used by Linux/Unix people than Windows people. > Another thing is that C# doesn't force any specific organizational > scheme; it just provides more mechanisms to do so. This is probably a > by-product of being compiled however. > > Although I've heard you can compile PHP as well; I've never had any > experience with it. Be careful there, it is my understanding that C# is compiled to bytecode. This is like calling java a compiled language. When I think compiled, I think c, Pascal, COBOL, assembly, etc. Compiling to bytecode certainly has advantages, but it is still interpreted. The nice thing about compiling to byte code is being able to transfer "compiled" code across platforms. You still need to have interpreters compiled to the machine code for every platform. <tangent> Also a byte code compiled language may or may not be as fast an "interpreted" language. Also different programs may perform differently based on coding style. Long ago on a planet far, far away, I wrote an interpreted VB program that ran faster than a compiled c program. This was a proof of concept demonstration, and I would never put such an app into a live system. It was what you might call extreme code reuse (it had 1 text box that pretended to 50, the c program actually had 50 text boxes). It was a real ugly VB program. </tangent>

1 0

RE: PHP versus ASP.NET WAS: Test Hosting Recommendation
by Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) 16 Feb '05

16 Feb '05

>Well it is really up to the developer to compartmentalize the code. That is >what we get paid the big bucks for. As far as scaling, take a look at >squirrelmail and phpgedview. Both of these PHP apps are quite professional >and phpGedView is considered the best genealogy web viewing app on the >"market". They are around 8 and 4 MB of code respectively and are quite >well compartmentalized if you ask me. I have done some tweaking to the code >on phpGedView on my site, and have not had any problem understanding the >organization of the developer. In fact the hardest programs I have ever had >to debug and understand were those that were "compartmentalized" by a >program for the developer rather than by the developer. So, I consider a >language that predefines where to compartmentalize things to be a downside. >To each their own though. Oh I agree. All I was speaking for was my personal experience, which was that C# is easier to organize that PHP. Both languages I learned from books, and of the two I've seen more professional C# code than I have PHP. I should probably take a look at these two projects and see if there are any organizations tricks I can pickup from them. Another thing is that C# doesn't force any specific organizational scheme; it just provides more mechanisms to do so. This is probably a by-product of being compiled however. Although I've heard you can compile PHP as well; I've never had any experience with it.

1 0

RE: Test Hosting Recommendation
by Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) 16 Feb '05

16 Feb '05

>I haven't tried ASP.NET yet. Did Mono write their own implementation of the >ASP library that you build the assembly against or are you supposed to use >the ASP.NET libraries from a Windows platform? They've reimplementation their own libraries. Like from the original post, if you want to try to run ASP.NET applications on Linux, monoForge is the place to go. I was also successful in getting it to run on my local development machine, but it was a pain. I do think it's possible to just copy the Microsoft assemblies over, but I'm not sure of the legality of the whole thing. Also, Microsoft has been known to take shortcuts in their framework and merely wrap their .Net libraries around the old COM libraries. I'm not sure if any of the ASP.NET libraries would have this problem, but the System.Data libraries might. These would not run on Linux, of course. Mono has done this to a limited equivalent extent on Linux, but always with the plans to implement a completely managed version in the future. Mono has implemented or is working on implementing two different stacks of libraries. The first is the complete Microsoft stack, and the second is their own stack (GTK# etc.). For a while, they were not planning on implementing the Web Services stack, but then a company paid them to do so, so now that's possible on Mono now as well. I'm not sure if there are other similar situations. Josh

1 0

RE: PHP versus ASP.NET WAS: Test Hosting Recommendation
by Brian Densmore 16 Feb '05

16 Feb '05

> -----Original Message----- > From: Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) > > > ... It's been my experience that php doesn't scale up to larger projects > very well when compared to .Net/C#. It quickly becomes an > organizational nightmare. With C# and .NET(which includes > mono), it is very easy to compartmentalize your code any number of ways. For > example, put you entire data access layer in one assembly( shared > library), you business objects into another, security and > permissions in > another, etc. etc. You can use a different namespace for each one to > make your code more readable. And namespaces can be shared across > assemblies. > Well it is really up to the developer to compartmentalize the code. That is what we get paid the big bucks for. As far as scaling, take a look at squirrelmail and phpgedview. Both of these PHP apps are quite professional and phpGedView is considered the best genealogy web viewing app on the "market". They are around 8 and 4 MB of code respectively and are quite well compartmentalized if you ask me. I have done some tweaking to the code on phpGedView on my site, and have not had any problem understanding the organization of the developer. In fact the hardest programs I have ever had to debug and understand were those that were "compartmentalized" by a program for the developer rather than by the developer. So, I consider a language that predefines where to compartmentalize things to be a downside. To each their own though. I'm not saying that PHP is a magic bullet. I just like things that I can display on my browser at home and in the office and not have strange things happen. Something I notice happens quite frequently with .Net. JMHO, Brian

1 0

RE: Test Hosting Recommendation
by Charles, Joshua Micah (UMKC-Student) 16 Feb '05

16 Feb '05

>Also, just for kicks, try compiling your code >with monoc. The resulting assemblies might be more... agnostic. I did forget to mention this. If you are building a solution with visual studio, it is a good idea to recompile the solution with the mono compiler. The way build numbers are used in visual studio sometimes messes up the mono runtime, and compiling on mono eliminates this issue. This also demonstrates one of the real strengths of .NET / Mono. It is fun to write an application in C# on either Linux or windows, and compile it, then copy the executable over and run it on the other platform. Or just copy the source code over and compile it on the other platform, and then copy it back and run it. Or any other combination you choose. This isn't limited to Web applications either. Command line based applications work the same way. Applications using the Windows.Forms library will run, although you may run into problems, I'm not sure. Mono was depending on wine to correctly display the windows.forms controls, but now they are implementing a completely managed implementation. The gtk bindings (GTK#) runs on Windows, Linux, and Mac OSX. So now you can write applications that run on all three platforms *without* recompiling. But what about dependencies? In both the .Net framework and the Mono Framework, any custom libraries you depend on can either be loaded into the GAC (Global Assembly Cache) or merely reside in the same directory as the executable. Or any other predefined location. Come to think of it, you could probably define this location at runtime using Reflection... But now I've wandered a bit from the originally reply (Sorry Jason). Josh

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG