[RevServer tips] Spreading the load or why wise developers use asynchronous workflows

wayne durden wdurden at gmail.com
Wed Aug 4 12:59:58 EDT 2010


Thanks Andre, and I am working through your article now as well.  I get that
it is per process but the part that isn't still clear to me is that the OS
can be doing my intensive process for 30 seconds before closing it and also
attending to another user simultaneously or not.  I am under the impression
there is still some resource slicing going on, I just don't have a concrete
understanding...

This is all very interesting to me because I am interested in moving a
desktop app that processes datafiles up to 100,000 lines which can mean for
each line comparing against the remainder (in reality sorts cust this down a
great deal), but this can run for minutes on a desktop app and I have got to
cut it down into asynchronous processing as per your article...

Thanks!

Wayne

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Andre Garzia <andre at andregarzia.com> wrote:

> Wayne,
>
> you got it wrong, it is a per process limitation. The policies change from
> shared hosting company to shared hosting company. At On-Rev means that a
> single process can only use 30 secs of processing time, this is done
> precisely to prevent a rogue process from using all the resources and thus
> making the life of other users a mess. No one can hog the whole server for
> 30 seconds because, there is a CPU limit as well. It is not just time, the
> limits are set so all users can reach the limit without affecting each
> other. Thats the idea
>
> Andre
>
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 1:49 PM, wayne durden <wdurden at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just want to make sure I have the general understanding of the issues...
> >  On
> > a shared hosting setup where there is a process time limit such as 30
> > seconds, would that mean that some other entity using the same server
> with
> > an intensive process could latch essentially all of the processing for up
> > to
> > 30 seconds?  Is there a more finely granulated check that still swaps
> users
> > in and out to a degree below a certain process priority claim?  And if
> the
> > first assertion is the case, it wouldn't matter what tech one went with
> > Rev,
> > Ruby, PHP, etc. you could still get a wait time of almost 30 seconds
> before
> > the server ended your sharer's processing and reached you, correct?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Wayne
> > _______________________________________________
> > use-revolution mailing list
> > use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> > subscription preferences:
> > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.andregarzia.com All We Do Is Code.
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>



More information about the Use-livecode mailing list