I would also support the fact that big companies are still using NTLM
for non-critical resources (as a convenience).
This is also my goal here (to protect a non-critical resource).
> For the future, the way to go is Kerberos; this is what Microsoft is pushing
> in replacement for NTLM.
Any good l
> Hi All,
> So they did a complete rewrite without changing the hardware?
> My guess is that the site on the same hardware would be substantially slower.
A change to the database design, as well as database engine (e.g.,
to something fantastic like PostgreSQL), indexing strategies, e
On 4/4/2012 1:41 PM, Fred Moyer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:37 AM, demerphq wrote:
>> On 4 April 2012 09:31, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>> When was the last time you built perl with no threading support? It's
>>> certainly a 5%-15% win.
>>
>> Not certainly. We did that and saw almost
On 4 Apr 2012, at 19:41, Fred Moyer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:37 AM, demerphq wrote:
>> On 4 April 2012 09:31, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>> When was the last time you built perl with no threading support? It's
>>> certainly a 5%-15% win.
>>
>> Not certainly. We did that and saw
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 6:37 AM, demerphq wrote:
> On 4 April 2012 09:31, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>
>> When was the last time you built perl with no threading support? It's
>> certainly a 5%-15% win.
>
> Not certainly. We did that and saw almost no difference.
I've done two perlbench sets of
demerphq schrieb am 04.04.2012 um 15:37 (+0200):
> > When was the last time you built perl with no threading support?
> > It's certainly a 5%-15% win.
>
> Not certainly. We did that and saw almost no difference.
As I see threads mentioned here: I know that there's some Perl threads
knowledge o
> > print STDERR
>
> I don't use "print STDERR" much. So, I am not sure if you have to set
> $|=1 for
> the handle. What happens if you replace "print STDERR" by "warn"? The
> postconfig phase comes after openlogs. So, STDERR should point to the
> main
> server errorlog.
For now, to avoid any such
I see a hit in the access logs.
I get an Internal Server Error.
And still, the error log is completely silent. This is my problem.
Without server errors I get a bit lost.
>>> This seems to be a config with VirtualHosts.
>>> Are you sure that you're looking in
On Wednesday, 04 April 2012 11:42:55 Josh Narins wrote:
> print STDERR
I don't use "print STDERR" much. So, I am not sure if you have to set $|=1 for
the handle. What happens if you replace "print STDERR" by "warn"? The
postconfig phase comes after openlogs. So, STDERR should point to the main
Josh Narins wrote:
I see a hit in the access logs.
I get an Internal Server Error.
And still, the error log is completely silent. This is my problem.
Without server errors I get a bit lost.
This seems to be a config with VirtualHosts.
Are you sure that you're looking in the correct error logs
>
Josh Narins
Director of Application Development
SeniorBridge
845 Third Ave
7th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Tel: (212) 994-6194
Mobile: (917) 488-6248
Fax: (212) 994-4260
jnar...@seniorbridge.com
SeniorBridge
Managing Complex Chronic Care
http://www.seniorbridge.com
SeniorBridge Statement of Con
> > I see a hit in the access logs.
> >
> > I get an Internal Server Error.
> >
> > And still, the error log is completely silent. This is my problem.
> Without server errors I get a bit lost.
> >
>
> This seems to be a config with VirtualHosts.
> Are you sure that you're looking in the correct err
On Wednesday, 04 April 2012 10:42:47 Josh Narins wrote:
> PerlModule Phase::PostConfig
> PerlPostConfigHandler Phase::PostConfig::handler
>
> and putting in the very simple:
>
> use Apache2::Const -compile => 'OK';
>
> sub post_config {
> print STDERR "configuration is complete\n";
> ret
Josh Narins wrote:
...
I see a hit in the access logs.
I get an Internal Server Error.
And still, the error log is completely silent. This is my problem. Without
server errors I get a bit lost.
This seems to be a config with VirtualHosts.
Are you sure that you're looking in the correct er
I'm porting a large mod_perl1 application to mod_perl2.
The server is now starting.
If I mistype some server configuration, it gives me errors, so I know the
configuration is being read.
I tried adding this:
PerlModule Phase::PostConfig
PerlPostConfigHandler Phase::PostConfig::handler
and put
Hi All,
So they did a complete rewrite without changing the hardware?
My guess is that the site on the same hardware would be substantially slower.
IMHO
Dave
On 04/04/12 08:23 AM, discobeta wrote:
agree, any rewrite of old code should improve by at least 10%, even if it was
written in
agree, any rewrite of old code should improve by at least 10%, even if it
was written in pascal
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:21 AM, André Warnier wrote:
> Rolf Banting wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Perrin Harkins wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>>
>>
>> If they were to
>>
>>> rewrite it in Perl t
Rolf Banting wrote:
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Perrin Harkins wrote:
...
If they were to
rewrite it in Perl today, *it would go up again*!
- Perrin
No performance anxiety there then.
Particularly with a non-threaded Perl, which allows Apache to fork multiple
times..
On 4 April 2012 09:31, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 4/3/2012 9:50 PM, Jim Schueler wrote:
>> Hope this doesn't get trapped by too many spam filters.
>>
>> Sad news. Just saw a blog
>>
>> http://www.highscalability.com/
>>
>> that reports YouPorn.com switched from Perl to PHP. Apparently the
LOL
- Original Message -
From: Rolf Banting
To: Perrin Harkins
Cc: Jim Schueler ; modperl@perl.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: highscalability.com report
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Perrin Harkins wrote:
...
If they were t
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Perrin Harkins wrote:
> ...
If they were to
> rewrite it in Perl today, *it would go up again*!
>
> - Perrin
>
No performance anxiety there then.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Jim Schueler wrote:
> that reports YouPorn.com switched from Perl to PHP. Apparently there's a
> reported 10% improvement in speed, but I haven't noticed :).
We lost YouPorn?! Tragic!
I'd say the joke's on them though. If you rewrite an old site and
only get a
On 04/04/2012 10:31, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 4/3/2012 9:50 PM, Jim Schueler wrote:
>> Hope this doesn't get trapped by too many spam filters.
>>
>> Sad news. Just saw a blog
>>
>> http://www.highscalability.com/
>>
>> that reports YouPorn.com switched from Perl to PHP. Apparently there'
William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 3/30/2012 1:56 AM, Dami Laurent (PJ) wrote:
-Message d'origine-
De : André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
I was considering forking the module and fixing bugs like these, but I
am not quite sure how much sense that makes given the fact that NTLM is
deprec
On 4/3/2012 9:50 PM, Jim Schueler wrote:
> Hope this doesn't get trapped by too many spam filters.
>
> Sad news. Just saw a blog
>
> http://www.highscalability.com/
>
> that reports YouPorn.com switched from Perl to PHP. Apparently there's a
> reported 10%
> improvement in speed, but I have
On 3/30/2012 1:56 AM, Dami Laurent (PJ) wrote:
>> -Message d'origine-
>> De : André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
>>>
>>> I was considering forking the module and fixing bugs like these, but I
>>> am not quite sure how much sense that makes given the fact that NTLM is
>>> deprecated tech
26 matches
Mail list logo
