From: Mark Hubbart <discord@...>
Date: 2004-05-06T01:13:00+09:00
Subject: Re: The quest for opensource database...


On May 5, 2004, at 12:08 AM, Sascha Ebach wrote:

> Hi Ryan,
>
> Ryan Pavlik wrote:
>
>> It does... I have found that approach to be rather performance-
>> inhibited as you seem to be finding as well.  What I did is make the
>> CGI very thin, and do all the work in a persistent backend.  The
>> benefits are manifold:
>
> Could you elobarate on what you mean by persistent backend and how it 
> avoids the syncronization problems?

(I'm not Ryan, but since he hasn't answered (yet))

I think he's talking about a separate server running in the background, 
which handles all logic and data requests, not serving them in html 
format, just data.

If you build an app that serves data, processes logins, etc., it makes 
it easier to deal with cached data, without having to worry about 
keeping things in sync. The thin cgi front-end requests the data for 
the page, and the persistent app determines whether to send cached data 
or not. This allows you to keep everything in sync, and has several 
fringe benefits: easier sessions, simplified logic, better abstraction.

If you have a decent-sized webapp to build, and your host allows 
persistant processes, this might be the way to go. It makes it so you 
are coding two separate projects: the app, and the website frontend. 
This separation can make things much simpler, IMHO.

cheers,
--Mark