[Lispweb] www.fast-index.com

Craig Brozefsky craig at red-bean.com
Tue Jun 12 10:33:15 CDT 2001


"Marc Battyani" <marc.battyani at fractalconcept.com> writes:

> Yes, it would be nice if we could use cookies... But as I generally disable
> them (and I clear them often), I know it's not reliable.
> Using URI encoding for session tracking works well excepted when the URI is
> bookmarked or archived in a search engine.
> I would also welcome some ideas on the subject....

Dpeending on how you encoe your state into the session, and how much
other information is stored in the URI, one can just discard the
session-id and recalculate the page in a new context if the original
session has timed out.  The difficulty is coming up with a scheme that
fits these requirements.

> Could you give more info about this? It's not my experience.  In
> mod_lisp 2.0, I keep the Apache <-> Lisp socket open and I haven't
> found any problems so far. As it's a direct Apache -> Lisp
> connection, if the Lisp process is dead then your server is dead but
> it's the same in your case. If it's only the processing of a request
> that is dead then this page is stuck but the server is still alive
> for other requests. When the user try to reload the page, a new
> connection is made. As we are in Lisp and not in lesser language we
> can correctly trap errors in the Lisp process and reply an error
> page without closing or blocking the Apache connection.  I've found
> a very big improvement by not closing the socket. On the benchmarks
> I've done, I've got a factor going from x 40 to x 80 !

I can't wait to get IMHO running on top of mod_lisp. We're using
mod_webapp now and the error handling ont he C side is just
atrocious.

-- 
Craig Brozefsky                             <craig at red-bean.com>
                                  http://www.red-bean.com/~craig
"Indifference is the dead weight of history." -- Antonio Gramsci



More information about the lispweb mailing list