Trying to replace AOLserver with Apache is like trying to replace
Zope with Apache or WebLogic with IIS. They're two completely
different things. You cannot replace AOLserver with Apache
because they play completely different roles in the architecture.
AOLserver is an application platform with a Tcl interpreter, a
powerful database API, and a really fast threaded architecture.
Apache is a web listener with a standardized API for adding
different means of processing web requests.
If you want to compare AOLserver to something else, compare it
to mod_perl. You might run Apache, mod_perl, and PostgreSQL
as one architecture. You could also run Apache, mod_proxy-to-
AOLserver, and PostgreSQL as another architecture. AOLserver
is your *application server*. Now it just so happens that
AOLserver is a darn good web listener, too. So you can take out
the Apache layer and keep just AOLserver and PostgreSQL.
When Don says there's a solution in the works for Apache 2.0,
what he means is that there is a mod_* solution in the works
that will allow the easy layering of Apache 2.0 on top of
AOLserver (or onto an AOLserver-like component that also does
Tcl evaluation in a threaded environment with all the AOLserver
APIs).
Now take a step back. If you have two architectures, one of which
requires 2 components to function, the other one of which
requires these same 2 components to function *plus* a third
one.... which one presents less risk, increased simplicity, and
generally a more sane platform?
AOLserver is not a web server. It is an application server. Layer
all the web servers you want on top of it if it helps solve a
marketing problem, but it will only make your technology platform
that much more complicated.
Request notifications