Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] Re: Architecture for XP and scalable web sites

Expand Messages
  • Laurent Bossavit
    ... Wouldn t it be worse if you selected the most scalable technology, took longer to implement the project, *and* found the system didn t respond well to high
    Message 1 of 22 , Jan 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      > The worst that can happen if the most scalable technology is
      > selected is the project takes longer to implement and the
      > deployment costs are slightly higher. The worst that can happen if
      > we go for lightweight solutions is that we find the system is
      > unusable when it eventually gets deployed. That would be bad!

      Wouldn't it be worse if you selected the most scalable technology,
      took longer to implement the project, *and* found the system didn't
      respond well to high loads when deployed ?

      Do you have any guarantee that won't happen ? What steps can be
      taken to prevent this happening ?


      ========================================
      We aim to make simple things simple and
      complex things possible.
      ========================================
      Laurent Bossavit - Software Architect
      >>> laurent.bossavit@... <<<
      >>> 06 68 15 11 44 <<<
      >> ICQ#39281367 <<
      Agence Bless http://www.agencebless.com/
      ========================================
    • Keith Richardson
      ... What a great forum - I posted a message at 10pm and got many great responses by 7am!! Either you guys never sleep or most of you are not is the EST time
      Message 2 of 22 , Jan 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In extremeprogramming@egroups.com, "Laurent Bossavit"
        <laurent.bossavit@a...> wrote:
        > > The worst that can happen if the most scalable technology is
        > > selected is the project takes longer to implement and the
        > > deployment costs are slightly higher. The worst that can happen if
        > > we go for lightweight solutions is that we find the system is
        > > unusable when it eventually gets deployed. That would be bad!
        >
        > Wouldn't it be worse if you selected the most scalable technology,
        > took longer to implement the project, *and* found the system didn't
        > respond well to high loads when deployed ?
        >
        > Do you have any guarantee that won't happen ? What steps can be
        > taken to prevent this happening ?

        What a great forum - I posted a message at 10pm and got many great
        responses by 7am!! Either you guys never sleep or most of you are not
        is the EST time zone!

        The clear consensus is to keep the technology simple. Now to pick a
        robust and simple technology that works well with XP. Java is a much
        cleaner environment than ActiveX which would suggest not using MS-
        based development environment for IIS. A new question: what
        combination of development tools and deployment environment is best
        for a Web application built using XP? It should have a clean object
        model and a build environment that allows for rapid development cycle
        times. It must also be robust and a good performer because I don't
        want to be kludging around limitations or speed bottlenecks. What is
        being used for XP and how is it working?
        Keith Richardson
      • Chad Fowler
        ... cycle ... I would suggest that keeping your technology choice as open as possible is a good plan. This enables you to start with simplicity and grow when
        Message 3 of 22 , Jan 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          >
          > The clear consensus is to keep the technology simple. Now to pick a
          > robust and simple technology that works well with XP. Java is a much
          > cleaner environment than ActiveX which would suggest not using MS-
          > based development environment for IIS. A new question: what
          > combination of development tools and deployment environment is best
          > for a Web application built using XP? It should have a clean object
          > model and a build environment that allows for rapid development
          cycle
          > times. It must also be robust and a good performer because I don't
          > want to be kludging around limitations or speed bottlenecks. What is
          > being used for XP and how is it working?
          > Keith Richardson

          I would suggest that keeping your technology choice as open as
          possible is a good plan. This enables you to start with simplicity
          and grow when the need arises with less investment than a proprietary
          alternative would afford. We are successfully using and deploying
          Enhydra (http://www.enhydra.org) in a change-heavy iterative
          development environment. We have been very happy with its performance
          and flexibility (as well as its price--Open Source).
        • Stefan Schmiedl
          They work 40 hour weeks and hence have lots of free time on their hands.... :-) Stefan +---------+------------------------- ...
          Message 4 of 22 , Jan 2, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            They work 40 hour weeks and hence have lots of free time on their
            hands.... :-)

            Stefan

            +---------+-------------------------
            | from | Keith Richardson <keith@...>
            | to | extremeprogramming@egroups.com <extremeprogramming@egroups.com>
            | date | 02.01.2001 16:13
            | subject | [XP] Re: Architecture for XP and scalable web sites
            +---------+-------------------------

            K> What a great forum - I posted a message at 10pm and got many great
            K> responses by 7am!! Either you guys never sleep or most of you are not
            K> is the EST time zone!
          • astl@home.com
            ... using ... the ... be ... to ... application ... by environment ... no ... solution ... traffic. ... features ... Do the user stories say don t lose my
            Message 5 of 22 , Jan 12, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In extremeprogramming@egroups.com, "Chad Fowler"
              <chadfowler@y...> wrote:
              > --- In extremeprogramming@egroups.com, "Keith Richardson"
              > <keith@s...> wrote:
              > > Hello,
              > > This forum has included several messages describing problems
              using
              > XP
              > > with EJB, describing EJB as non-OO and other difficulties with
              the
              > > EJB architecture. A highly scalable web site must be able to
              > automate
              > > persistance of session and environment data, allow deployment to
              be
              > > easily adjusted and many other features that EJBs (and more
              > > completely J2EE) provides. Are there other environments that have
              > > proven to be better for developing highly scalable solutions with
              > XP
              > > or should I interpret these messages as saying that XP is not
              > > applicable for these needs? Any XP success stories in this area
              to
              > be
              > > shared?
              > > Keith Richardson
              >
              > I think the point of a lot of these messages is that EJB is not, at
              > least at the beginning of a project, (in most cases) the simplest
              > thing that could possibly work. A well factored servlet
              application
              > provides session persistence (not sure what you mean
              by "environment"
              > in this context) and (being well factored) would also give
              > flexibility for deployment options (things are logically decoupled,
              > so they can be physically separated down the road).
              >
              > In the past, our developers were assuming that scalable-web-
              > application == J2EE-all-the-way and just going with EJB from the
              > start. This instroduced complexity in the code, the
              > development/build process, and the application server deployment.
              > This complexity invariably lead to various problems (more points of
              > potential failure).
              >
              > The approach we've taken semi-recently with our developers is to
              > say, "You are free to use EJB (and the rest of the J2EE baggage) if
              > you can explain why you need it." What we've found so far is that
              no
              > one has ever needed it, and we haven't had any related problems.
              > (And, our applications are *so* much easier to deploy and maintain
              > now!) In the mean time, we've been trying to keep things well
              > factored, so they could be easily moved to the more complex
              solution
              > should we ever hit the scalability barriers of this approach. My
              > guess is that we won't ever get there.
              >
              > Of course, we're no amazon.com, but we get some pretty heavy
              traffic.
              >
              > Just as an addendum, here's my XP zealot answer:
              > "must be able to automate persistance of session and environment
              > data, allow deployment to be easily adjusted and many other
              features
              > that EJBs (and more completely J2EE) provides" wasn't in my user
              > stories. :)
              >
              > Chad

              Do the user stories say "don't lose my data that I am entering just
              because you want to update the servers?"

              Ken.
            • Alan Francis
              ... ... Can we PLEASE try to keep the copied text to a minimum ? Even if the two new lines are the most
              Message 6 of 22 , Jan 12, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In extremeprogramming@egroups.com, astl@h... wrote:
                <a zillion lines of copied message>
                <followed by....>
                > Do the user stories say "don't lose my data that I am entering just
                > because you want to update the servers?"

                Can we PLEASE try to keep the copied text to a minimum ? Even if the
                two new lines are the most insightful piece of observation yet, it's
                still anooying to get massive emails full of copied stuff.

                Maybe OMI could host an extremeprogramming wiki so conversations
                could be conversations ? :-)

                Alan
              • Chad Fowler
                ... If they do, then it s time to find the simplest solution that can satisfy the story--again, not limited to EJB (nor very likely to be).
                Message 7 of 22 , Jan 13, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  > > Just as an addendum, here's my XP zealot answer:
                  > > "must be able to automate persistance of session and environment
                  > > data, allow deployment to be easily adjusted and many other
                  > features
                  > > that EJBs (and more completely J2EE) provides" wasn't in my user
                  > > stories. :)
                  > >
                  > Do the user stories say "don't lose my data that I am entering just
                  > because you want to update the servers?"
                  >
                  > Ken.

                  If they do, then it's time to find the simplest solution that can
                  satisfy the story--again, not limited to EJB (nor very likely to be).
                • Erik Meade
                  I mentioned this to Ward a few weeks ago, he said that Extreme Programming is on topic for his (The) Wiki http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?FrontPage -- Erik Meade
                  Message 8 of 22 , Jan 17, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I mentioned this to Ward a few weeks ago, he said that Extreme
                    Programming is on topic for his (The) Wiki
                    http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?FrontPage

                    --
                    Erik Meade emeade@...
                    Senior Consultant Object Mentor, Inc.
                    http://www.junit.org


                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: "Alan Francis" <alan@...>
                    Subject: Re: Architecture for XP and scalable web sites

                    Maybe OMI could host an extremeprogramming wiki so conversations
                    could be conversations ? :-)

                    Alan
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.