Rev cgi vs. php

[David Brooks]

I have a site that does 1.8G/week, and has done as much as 5G/week for  
a sustained period (months). The 1.8g traffic  translates to about 1  
75-page book per minute, 24/7. I've had no issues at all using [the  
older] rev engine for the cgi portions of this traffic.

Based on something Jerry Daniels showed at RevCon  West, I store data  
in xml-like files. Some of my students have used MySQL with similar  
success. The traffic slow down at the site probably is due to storing  
data as xml files accessed through RunRev rather than static pages  
that one Googles and hits directly. The functionality of the site,  
supporting high school chemistry teachers taking graduate courses in  
chemistry pedagogy, has been enhanced.

There was a time when I used only HyperCard stacks as a backend. This  
depended upon generating and detecting an appleEvent. Because Apache  
does not generate appleEvents, an intermediary (ACGI Dispatcher) was  
used. This turns out to have what appears to be a 2^11 byte limit for  
data transfer.

Andre Garzia developed a workaround for this. If you are interested,  
perhaps you see whether Andre's consulting schedule can fit you in. If  
you are really good with RunRev and your traffic is low, this might be  
a good way to go, too.

WRT RunRev, both for stacks and cgi, I am a VERY satisfied customer.

Best,

Dave Brooks

> What advantages does Rev cgi have over PHP? Since I know Rev and  
> don't know PHP, it certainly has advantages for me. But how might I  
> argue this point to others who are familiar with PHP but not Rev?
>
> Thanks.
> Richard Miller