Web Application VS Windows Application
-
@wirestyle22 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
what makes apache not playing well with mysql if they are on the same server ??
They play fine, it's you we are trying to alter.
Q: Is this assuming he has a rather large server to expand into? The differing rates can be a big problem, no? I always looked at VM's as a means to make system resources more economical.
Assuming two individual VMs or one with the resources of those two.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
what makes apache not playing well with mysql if they are on the same server ??
They play fine, it's you we are trying to alter.
Q: Is this assuming he has a rather large server to expand into? The differing rates can be a big problem, no? I always looked at VM's as a means to make system resources more economical.
Assuming two individual VMs or one with the resources of those two.
I guess this means that you just have to calculate the growth rate and account for that. I see your point.
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
anyway it is another discussion about hypervisors we made it 6 months ago,
why it is recomended to make apache and mysql in seperate servers ??
because they compete heavily for physical resources and they scale at different rates
No, that's not an issue. Specifically the issue is the potential to write code that relies on locality.
please dear scott can you clear you point here, i'm not sure i understood you
Running local you can very easily get into doing things like copying database files, trying to look at file instead of properly database interfaces, trying to use local files instead of network interfaces, etc.
-
@wirestyle22 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
what makes apache not playing well with mysql if they are on the same server ??
They play fine, it's you we are trying to alter.
Q: Is this assuming he has a rather large server to expand into? The differing rates can be a big problem, no? I always looked at VM's as a means to make system resources more economical.
Assuming two individual VMs or one with the resources of those two.
I guess this means that you just have to calculate the growth rate and account for that. I see your point.
You have to do that anyway
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
what makes apache not playing well with mysql if they are on the same server ??
They play fine, it's you we are trying to alter.
Q: Is this assuming he has a rather large server to expand into? The differing rates can be a big problem, no? I always looked at VM's as a means to make system resources more economical.
Assuming two individual VMs or one with the resources of those two.
I guess this means that you just have to calculate the growth rate and account for that. I see your point.
You have to do that anyway
I realized that when you made a point without making a point. I shake my head at myself sometimes
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
anyway it is another discussion about hypervisors we made it 6 months ago,
why it is recomended to make apache and mysql in seperate servers ??
because they compete heavily for physical resources and they scale at different rates
No, that's not an issue. Specifically the issue is the potential to write code that relies on locality.
please dear scott can you clear you point here, i'm not sure i understood you
Running local you can very easily get into doing things like copying database files, trying to look at file instead of properly database interfaces, trying to use local files instead of network interfaces, etc.
By writing your code to expect the database server to be on a different server than the web interface, it makes the system more scaleable as well... Even if you are just writing this to be used internally.
-
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
anyway it is another discussion about hypervisors we made it 6 months ago,
why it is recomended to make apache and mysql in seperate servers ??
because they compete heavily for physical resources and they scale at different rates
No, that's not an issue. Specifically the issue is the potential to write code that relies on locality.
please dear scott can you clear you point here, i'm not sure i understood you
Running local you can very easily get into doing things like copying database files, trying to look at file instead of properly database interfaces, trying to use local files instead of network interfaces, etc.
By writing your code to expect the database server to be on a different server than the web interface, it makes the system more scaleable as well... Even if you are just writing this to be used internally.
You mean because it assumes that single system running VM's will eventually not be enough, correct?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
Ya mine's using close to 2GB
Are you sure? I don't think that tool tell syou how much is used.
That's the RAM for each VM and the host. 8% is allocated for the dom0.
I mean, didi you run free to see what was REALLY used?
Used is like 702, I changed the response above.
I'm not going to be confident in that number till someone shows me the real free -m output rather than something translated for me.
ok......
-
@wirestyle22 said:
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
anyway it is another discussion about hypervisors we made it 6 months ago,
why it is recomended to make apache and mysql in seperate servers ??
because they compete heavily for physical resources and they scale at different rates
No, that's not an issue. Specifically the issue is the potential to write code that relies on locality.
please dear scott can you clear you point here, i'm not sure i understood you
Running local you can very easily get into doing things like copying database files, trying to look at file instead of properly database interfaces, trying to use local files instead of network interfaces, etc.
By writing your code to expect the database server to be on a different server than the web interface, it makes the system more scaleable as well... Even if you are just writing this to be used internally.
You mean because it assumes that single system running VM's will eventually not be enough, correct?
Right. It makes it easier to add another web server to the mix, or another database server... I've never had an application scale to that large, but the code was in there so that it could.
-
@dafyre said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
anyway it is another discussion about hypervisors we made it 6 months ago,
why it is recomended to make apache and mysql in seperate servers ??
because they compete heavily for physical resources and they scale at different rates
No, that's not an issue. Specifically the issue is the potential to write code that relies on locality.
please dear scott can you clear you point here, i'm not sure i understood you
Running local you can very easily get into doing things like copying database files, trying to look at file instead of properly database interfaces, trying to use local files instead of network interfaces, etc.
By writing your code to expect the database server to be on a different server than the web interface, it makes the system more scaleable as well... Even if you are just writing this to be used internally.
You mean because it assumes that single system running VM's will eventually not be enough, correct?
Right. It makes it easier to add another web server to the mix, or another database server... I've never had an application scale to that large, but the code was in there so that it could.
Makes sense to me.
-
@dafyre i just take a look over RedBeanPHP framework, it looks great, but it is working with OOP method not procedural method, so i supposed you are following OOP method isn't it ???
-
it is similar to EJB in J2EE, modeling framework that facilitate DB managment
-
-
great, so i will tried to use this framework because really i liked it, wow it reduce a massive amount of time of coding SQL queries, everything function is ready(store, delete, update ) thank you for this advice
-
do you use json and ajax in your PHP code ?? for me i really liked them both,
-
they allow you to fetch data and display data from DB without refreshing the page
-
@IT-ADMIN said:
great, so i will tried to use this framework because really i liked it, wow it reduce a massive amount of time of coding SQL queries, everything function is ready(store, delete, update ) thank you for this advice
There's a command you should issue once you get things closer to production ready... It will prevent RB4 from making any changes to the database structure. I forget what it is, but I haven't gotten any apps that far with it yet, lol.
-
i know that command, hhhh
it is :
R::freeze(1); -
@wirestyle22 said:
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@wirestyle22 said:
@IT-ADMIN said:
anyway it is another discussion about hypervisors we made it 6 months ago,
why it is recomended to make apache and mysql in seperate servers ??
because they compete heavily for physical resources and they scale at different rates
No, that's not an issue. Specifically the issue is the potential to write code that relies on locality.
please dear scott can you clear you point here, i'm not sure i understood you
Running local you can very easily get into doing things like copying database files, trying to look at file instead of properly database interfaces, trying to use local files instead of network interfaces, etc.
By writing your code to expect the database server to be on a different server than the web interface, it makes the system more scaleable as well... Even if you are just writing this to be used internally.
You mean because it assumes that single system running VM's will eventually not be enough, correct?
Eventually or at least, potentially.
-
@johnhooks said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
Ya mine's using close to 2GB
Are you sure? I don't think that tool tell syou how much is used.
That's the RAM for each VM and the host. 8% is allocated for the dom0.
I mean, didi you run free to see what was REALLY used?
Used is like 702, I changed the response above.
I'm not going to be confident in that number till someone shows me the real free -m output rather than something translated for me.
ok......
I see you using 497, not 702. More than expected, less than stated.
