[Lispweb] Mod_lisp 2.0 released

Andrew K. Wolven awolven at redfernlane.org
Sun Jun 17 21:07:05 CDT 2001


mdanish at andrew.cmu.edu wrote:

> IIRC, the reason that Jakarta-Tomcat does not serve it's own pages
> via it's own HTTP server (and it does have one), is because
> 1. The Tomcat HTTP server is slow and an incomplete implementation
> 2. It is not as secure as Apache, and not as well maintained
> 3. It means defining security in two different places:
>    - The apache configuration files
>    - The Tomcat configuration files
>    And Apache is a lot more configurable than the Tomcat HTTP server.
>
> It seems to me that a lot of the same issues would apply to mod_lisp
> and whatever backend.
>

Please tell me what IIRC is a clever acronym/abbrev for, and also, if you could,
please tell me what that Jakarta-Tomcat http server is about.  I might be able to
understand what point you are getting at.

Thanks,
Andrew


>
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 07:51:31PM -0500, Andrew K. Wolven wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Marc Battyani wrote:
> >
> > > I just released mod_lisp 2.0 here :
> > > http://www.fractalconcept.com/asp/mod_lisp
> > > mod_lisp is an Apache module to easily write web applications in Lisp.
> > >
> > > It has been completely re-written and now it reuses the Apache <-> Lisp
> > > sockets, boosting performance by a factor of up to 80.
> > >
> > > mod_lisp talk from Apache to lisp processes by sockets with a very
> > > straightforward protocol to handle a request. It now reuses the Apache to
> > > Lisp sockets for improved performance. Future versions will probably be more
> > > Lisp specific, but for now it can be used by any other language.
> > >
> > > Why mod_lisp?
> > >
> > > -The Lisp servers are application servers. I don't want to bother the Lisp
> > > applications with things like serving gif or jpeg files or even static pages
> > > in some cases. Using mod_lisp I can separate the HTTP servers from the
> > > application servers.
> > > The architecture I am promoting is like this: One or more Apache front ends
> > > to serve static content (like images), one or more Lisp application servers
> > > to process the application logic and databases servers to store the data.
> > >
> > > -Time is the scarcest resource so I don't want to waste it to implement
> > > things like SSL (though an SSL implementation in Lisp is useful for other
> > > purposes), keeping up to date with HTTP protocols etc. The Apache people do
> > > this with a sufficient quality, I don't see any interest to do it myself.
> > >
> > > -I can benefit from the Apache modules if I need them (mod_gzip for
> > > instance)
> > >
> > > -The market acceptance is quite better. It's really easier to sell an Apache
> > > + FreeBSD + (Postgresql or Oracle) + Lisp solution than a Lisp + FreeBSD +
> > > (Postgresql or Oracle) solution. In the first case Lisp is perceived as yet
> > > another web language like Perl, Python and others. In the second case you
> > > have to advocate the use of Lisp.
> > >
> > > -mod_lisp is released under a FreeBSD style license.
> > >
> > > -It's easier to work on a project where the Lisp web application is only a
> > > part of a web site.
> > >
> > > It's in a beta stage. So please report the bugs you can find to me so that I
> > > can include them. (you can also report to me the English mistakes I have
> > > made in the mod_lisp pages...)
> > >
> > > Marc
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Lispweb mailing list
> > > Lispweb at red-bean.com
> > > http://www.red-bean.com/mailman/listinfo/lispweb
> >
> > Dear Marc,
> > I really appreciate your work on mod_lisp in that it helps give unix
> > jockeys one
> > less excuse for not using the highest quality standards in software
> > engineering,
> > namely ANSI Common Lisp and relatives.  However, I think that the design
> > reasons
> > that you have described above are full of hot air and that's why you
> > have to add
> > steel cables to keep your balloon from floating off.  You are adding an
> > extra
> > layer of sockets and the protocol to go with it which only forces a lisp
> > hacker
> > to have to waste time learning/administrating Apache/mod_lisp in
> > addition to
> > programming/administrating a lisp [application] server.  (and will
> > probably make
> > the response time of your http request go up by 20% or so on average)  I
> > happen
> > to believe strongly, as well as have evidence based on government work
> > experience, that people that stack engineering on top of buzzwords are
> > doomed.
> > If you must offload your static data to an Apache server for
> > performance/admin/political or other reasons, you don't need a backdoor
> > connection to the server since the browser can connect to the static
> > content
> > server directly.  Simply have your lisp [application] server emit the
> > correct
> > url to the static content.  I seem to remember this debate from a while
> > back and
> > it seemed fresh and dandy then, but now that I have had time to mull
> > over it and
> > run some live sites, I have to say 'wait a minute'.
> >
> > AKW
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lispweb mailing list
> > Lispweb at red-bean.com
> > http://www.red-bean.com/mailman/listinfo/lispweb
>
> --
> ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
> ;; Matthew Danish                         email: mdanish at andrew.cmu.edu ;;
> ;; OpenPGP public key available from:        'finger mrd at db.debian.org' ;;
> ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;




More information about the lispweb mailing list