I want to jump in and do a Scala/Lift project on the Google
AppEngine. Since I'm still pretty much a beginner in all 3
technologies, I figure it's best to start with Scala 2.8/Lift 2 since
they're almost production ready. Can someone point me to a couple of
recent blogs to get me started? I'm not sure what changes occurred in
the latest Scala/Lift versions so I'm not sure if older blog posts are
still completely accurate.
I can't speak on behalf of behalf of the current Lift 2 status, the extent of my contributions to the project was suggesting tail merge (hint: it wasn't recent)
Scala 2.8 though, and app deployments, I am a bit more familiar with everything that's going on there :)
So... I'd *definitely* recommend stax.net over GAE
a) It offers a Maven-based test/build/deploy solution. b) It can handle threads and actors. c) It's based on EC2, and can scale up nicely if your site suddenly gets all popular and profitable. d) Stax.net use some Scala internally, so you'll find them very helpful and friendly if you encounter any issues.
I can also confirm that I'm not running into any issues with the Lift 2.0 snapshot against Scala 2.8.0.RC6. And you're going to want 2.8 if you're after Squeryl or the massively improved collections library, or simply to work with a recent version of the eclipse plugin.
On 27 June 2010 17:45, melling <mmellinge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I want to jump in and do a Scala/Lift project on the Google > AppEngine. Since I'm still pretty much a beginner in all 3 > technologies, I figure it's best to start with Scala 2.8/Lift 2 since > they're almost production ready. Can someone point me to a couple of > recent blogs to get me started? I'm not sure what changes occurred in > the latest Scala/Lift versions so I'm not sure if older blog posts are > still completely accurate.
> -Mike
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
We already use GAE and I don't think we can change at this point, but we'll consider it at a later stage. I found this and got my HelloWorld Lift program running under Jetty.
There must be some sort of template for Google's AppEngine. Now I'm reading through StartingWithLift.pdf.
You know how it is when learning something new. Just gotta connect a lot of dots. Unfortunately, the dots are versioned and I'm probably gonna get burned mixing and matching Scala 2.8/Lift 2.0 and Scala 2.7/Lift 1.0.
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com> wrote: > I can't speak on behalf of behalf of the current Lift 2 status, the extent > of my contributions to the project was suggesting tail merge (hint: it > wasn't recent) > Scala 2.8 though, and app deployments, I am a bit more familiar with > everything that's going on there :) > So... I'd *definitely* recommend stax.net over GAE > a) It offers a Maven-based test/build/deploy solution. > b) It can handle threads and actors. > c) It's based on EC2, and can scale up nicely if your site suddenly gets all > popular and profitable. > d) Stax.net use some Scala internally, so you'll find them very helpful and > friendly if you encounter any issues.
> I can also confirm that I'm not running into any issues with the Lift 2.0 > snapshot against Scala 2.8.0.RC6. > And you're going to want 2.8 if you're after Squeryl or the massively > improved collections library, or simply to work with a recent version of the > eclipse plugin.
> On 27 June 2010 17:45, melling <mmellinge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I want to jump in and do a Scala/Lift project on the Google >> AppEngine. Since I'm still pretty much a beginner in all 3 >> technologies, I figure it's best to start with Scala 2.8/Lift 2 since >> they're almost production ready. Can someone point me to a couple of >> recent blogs to get me started? I'm not sure what changes occurred in >> the latest Scala/Lift versions so I'm not sure if older blog posts are >> still completely accurate.
>> -Mike
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lift" group. >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> I want to jump in and do a Scala/Lift project on the Google
> AppEngine. Since I'm still pretty much a beginner in all 3
> technologies, I figure it's best to start with Scala 2.8/Lift 2 since
> they're almost production ready. Can someone point me to a couple of
> recent blogs to get me started? I'm not sure what changes occurred in
> the latest Scala/Lift versions so I'm not sure if older blog posts are
> still completely accurate.
By running Lift on GAE you loose nearly all the awesome USPs that lift provides. If you just want a framework to do templating and some other stuff, then sure, lift on GAE will be fine... if you want to use actors or anything that using any kind of threading your going to be a little screwed with GAE.
Thats not to say you cant make cool apps with Lift on GAE, its just likely you are going to have to jump through a lot of hoops to make it happen.
Cheers, Tim
On 27 Jun 2010, at 21:37, Michael Mellinger wrote:
> We already use GAE and I don't think we can change at this point, but > we'll consider it at a later stage. I found this and got my > HelloWorld Lift program running under Jetty.
> There must be some sort of template for Google's AppEngine. Now I'm > reading through StartingWithLift.pdf.
> You know how it is when learning something new. Just gotta connect a > lot of dots. Unfortunately, the dots are versioned and I'm probably > gonna get burned mixing and matching Scala 2.8/Lift 2.0 and Scala > 2.7/Lift 1.0.
> -Mike
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I can't speak on behalf of behalf of the current Lift 2 status, the extent >> of my contributions to the project was suggesting tail merge (hint: it >> wasn't recent) >> Scala 2.8 though, and app deployments, I am a bit more familiar with >> everything that's going on there :) >> So... I'd *definitely* recommend stax.net over GAE >> a) It offers a Maven-based test/build/deploy solution. >> b) It can handle threads and actors. >> c) It's based on EC2, and can scale up nicely if your site suddenly gets all >> popular and profitable. >> d) Stax.net use some Scala internally, so you'll find them very helpful and >> friendly if you encounter any issues.
>> I can also confirm that I'm not running into any issues with the Lift 2.0 >> snapshot against Scala 2.8.0.RC6. >> And you're going to want 2.8 if you're after Squeryl or the massively >> improved collections library, or simply to work with a recent version of the >> eclipse plugin.
>> On 27 June 2010 17:45, melling <mmellinge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I want to jump in and do a Scala/Lift project on the Google >>> AppEngine. Since I'm still pretty much a beginner in all 3 >>> technologies, I figure it's best to start with Scala 2.8/Lift 2 since >>> they're almost production ready. Can someone point me to a couple of >>> recent blogs to get me started? I'm not sure what changes occurred in >>> the latest Scala/Lift versions so I'm not sure if older blog posts are >>> still completely accurate.
>>> -Mike
>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Lift" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lift" group. >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Justin S. <jws...@gmail.com> wrote: > FYI, I put together a pom.xml for the latest Lift 2.0, Scala 2.8, and > Specs testing over here:
> On Jun 27, 9:45 am, melling <mmellinge...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I want to jump in and do a Scala/Lift project on the Google >> AppEngine. Since I'm still pretty much a beginner in all 3 >> technologies, I figure it's best to start with Scala 2.8/Lift 2 since >> they're almost production ready. Can someone point me to a couple of >> recent blogs to get me started? I'm not sure what changes occurred in >> the latest Scala/Lift versions so I'm not sure if older blog posts are >> still completely accurate.
FWIW, I think you're going to be very disappointed with the Lift/GAE combination. Because GAE doesn't support all of the JVM's features and applies random constraints (e.g, requests for a given session may be served by different JVMs without any notice to the running application), you'll probably find that your Lift apps misbehave in random ways. If you've already settled of GAE, then I'd recommend another web framework such as Wicket or Play.
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Michael Mellinger <mmellinge...@gmail.com>wrote:
> We already use GAE and I don't think we can change at this point, but > we'll consider it at a later stage. I found this and got my > HelloWorld Lift program running under Jetty.
> There must be some sort of template for Google's AppEngine. Now I'm > reading through StartingWithLift.pdf.
> You know how it is when learning something new. Just gotta connect a > lot of dots. Unfortunately, the dots are versioned and I'm probably > gonna get burned mixing and matching Scala 2.8/Lift 2.0 and Scala > 2.7/Lift 1.0.
> -Mike
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Kevin Wright <kev.lee.wri...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I can't speak on behalf of behalf of the current Lift 2 status, the > extent > > of my contributions to the project was suggesting tail merge (hint: it > > wasn't recent) > > Scala 2.8 though, and app deployments, I am a bit more familiar with > > everything that's going on there :) > > So... I'd *definitely* recommend stax.net over GAE > > a) It offers a Maven-based test/build/deploy solution. > > b) It can handle threads and actors. > > c) It's based on EC2, and can scale up nicely if your site suddenly gets > all > > popular and profitable. > > d) Stax.net use some Scala internally, so you'll find them very helpful > and > > friendly if you encounter any issues.
> > I can also confirm that I'm not running into any issues with the Lift 2.0 > > snapshot against Scala 2.8.0.RC6. > > And you're going to want 2.8 if you're after Squeryl or the massively > > improved collections library, or simply to work with a recent version of > the > > eclipse plugin.
> > On 27 June 2010 17:45, melling <mmellinge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I want to jump in and do a Scala/Lift project on the Google > >> AppEngine. Since I'm still pretty much a beginner in all 3 > >> technologies, I figure it's best to start with Scala 2.8/Lift 2 since > >> they're almost production ready. Can someone point me to a couple of > >> recent blogs to get me started? I'm not sure what changes occurred in > >> the latest Scala/Lift versions so I'm not sure if older blog posts are > >> still completely accurate.
> >> -Mike
> >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > >> "Lift" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > >> For more options, visit this group at > >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Lift" group. > > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
Yeah, GAE was decided first, and work has already started. I heard you on FLOSS Weekly (http://twit.tv/floss125) and realized Scala 2.8 is here so it's probably a great time to toe-dip into Scala/Lift with some sort of project.
The yet another Java framework state of Java is a bit annoying and a hard sell on group projects. I was hoping Scala/Lift would snowball, and end the pain.
<feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote: > FWIW, I think you're going to be very disappointed with the Lift/GAE > combination. Because GAE doesn't support all of the JVM's features and > applies random constraints (e.g, requests for a given session may be served > by different JVMs without any notice to the running application), you'll > probably find that your Lift apps misbehave in random ways. If you've > already settled of GAE, then I'd recommend another web framework such as > Wicket or Play.
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Michael Mellinger <mmellinge...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> We already use GAE and I don't think we can change at this point, but >> we'll consider it at a later stage. I found this and got my >> HelloWorld Lift program running under Jetty.
>> There must be some sort of template for Google's AppEngine. Now I'm >> reading through StartingWithLift.pdf.
>> You know how it is when learning something new. Just gotta connect a >> lot of dots. Unfortunately, the dots are versioned and I'm probably >> gonna get burned mixing and matching Scala 2.8/Lift 2.0 and Scala >> 2.7/Lift 1.0.
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Michael Mellinger <mmellinge...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Yeah, GAE was decided first, and work has already started.
Bummer.
> I heard > you on FLOSS Weekly (http://twit.tv/floss125) and realized Scala 2.8 > is here so it's probably a great time to toe-dip into Scala/Lift with > some sort of project.
Maybe next time you have a project that's hosted anywhere except GAE you'll give Lift a try.
> The yet another Java framework state of Java is a bit annoying and a > hard sell on group projects. I was hoping Scala/Lift would snowball, > and end the pain.
Play is Java-based, but the Scala extension is very nice.
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:19 PM, David Pollak > <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote: > > FWIW, I think you're going to be very disappointed with the Lift/GAE > > combination. Because GAE doesn't support all of the JVM's features and > > applies random constraints (e.g, requests for a given session may be > served > > by different JVMs without any notice to the running application), you'll > > probably find that your Lift apps misbehave in random ways. If you've > > already settled of GAE, then I'd recommend another web framework such as > > Wicket or Play.
> > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Michael Mellinger < > mmellinge...@gmail.com> > > wrote:
> >> We already use GAE and I don't think we can change at this point, but > >> we'll consider it at a later stage. I found this and got my > >> HelloWorld Lift program running under Jetty.
> >> There must be some sort of template for Google's AppEngine. Now I'm > >> reading through StartingWithLift.pdf.
> >> You know how it is when learning something new. Just gotta connect a > >> lot of dots. Unfortunately, the dots are versioned and I'm probably > >> gonna get burned mixing and matching Scala 2.8/Lift 2.0 and Scala > >> 2.7/Lift 1.0.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
I remember a long while back that there was talk of implementing
actors on GAE by using a CRON job and by running them in the thread
that sent the message to the actor. Was this deemed impossible or bad
or was it just not done because of the small target audience and the
difficulty of implementation?
-Arthur
On Jun 27, 11:41 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Michael Mellinger
> <mmellinge...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > Yeah, GAE was decided first, and work has already started.
> Bummer.
> > I heard
> > you on FLOSS Weekly (http://twit.tv/floss125) and realized Scala 2.8
> > is here so it's probably a great time to toe-dip into Scala/Lift with
> > some sort of project.
> Maybe next time you have a project that's hosted anywhere except GAE you'll
> give Lift a try.
> > The yet another Java framework state of Java is a bit annoying and a
> > hard sell on group projects. I was hoping Scala/Lift would snowball,
> > and end the pain.
> Play is Java-based, but the Scala extension is very nice.
> > -Mike
> > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:19 PM, David Pollak
> > <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > FWIW, I think you're going to be very disappointed with the Lift/GAE
> > > combination. Because GAE doesn't support all of the JVM's features and
> > > applies random constraints (e.g, requests for a given session may be
> > served
> > > by different JVMs without any notice to the running application), you'll
> > > probably find that your Lift apps misbehave in random ways. If you've
> > > already settled of GAE, then I'd recommend another web framework such as
> > > Wicket or Play.
> > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Michael Mellinger <
> > mmellinge...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> We already use GAE and I don't think we can change at this point, but
> > >> we'll consider it at a later stage. I found this and got my
> > >> HelloWorld Lift program running under Jetty.
> > >> There must be some sort of template for Google's AppEngine. Now I'm
> > >> reading through StartingWithLift.pdf.
> > >> You know how it is when learning something new. Just gotta connect a
> > >> lot of dots. Unfortunately, the dots are versioned and I'm probably
> > >> gonna get burned mixing and matching Scala 2.8/Lift 2.0 and Scala
> > >> 2.7/Lift 1.0.
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Lift" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com >
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Arthur <arthur.pet...@gmail.com> wrote: > I remember a long while back that there was talk of implementing > actors on GAE by using a CRON job and by running them in the thread > that sent the message to the actor. Was this deemed impossible or bad > or was it just not done because of the small target audience and the > difficulty of implementation?
Doing any work for GAE is a waste of time. Why?
GAE is slow and non-scalable, despite Google's claims (everyone I've spoken with that have tried to scale GAE apps have failed and gone elsewhere).
GAE locks you into a tremendously suboptimal storage mechanism.
GAE is free, but so is Stax and there are many inexpensive options including SliceHost. Next up, you've got Amazon EC2 and RackSpace.
So, I haven't found a good reason for anyone to use GAE. And if there's no good reason to use GAE, devoting a pile of resources to code around the GAE JVM incompatibilities (e.g., no new threads) seems like a waste.
> On Jun 27, 11:41 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Michael Mellinger > > <mmellinge...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > Yeah, GAE was decided first, and work has already started.
> > Bummer.
> > > I heard > > > you on FLOSS Weekly (http://twit.tv/floss125) and realized Scala 2.8 > > > is here so it's probably a great time to toe-dip into Scala/Lift with > > > some sort of project.
> > Maybe next time you have a project that's hosted anywhere except GAE > you'll > > give Lift a try.
> > > The yet another Java framework state of Java is a bit annoying and a > > > hard sell on group projects. I was hoping Scala/Lift would snowball, > > > and end the pain.
> > Play is Java-based, but the Scala extension is very nice.
> > > -Mike
> > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:19 PM, David Pollak > > > <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > FWIW, I think you're going to be very disappointed with the Lift/GAE > > > > combination. Because GAE doesn't support all of the JVM's features > and > > > > applies random constraints (e.g, requests for a given session may be > > > served > > > > by different JVMs without any notice to the running application), > you'll > > > > probably find that your Lift apps misbehave in random ways. If > you've > > > > already settled of GAE, then I'd recommend another web framework such > as > > > > Wicket or Play.
> > > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Michael Mellinger < > > > mmellinge...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> We already use GAE and I don't think we can change at this point, > but > > > >> we'll consider it at a later stage. I found this and got my > > > >> HelloWorld Lift program running under Jetty.
> > > >> There must be some sort of template for Google's AppEngine. Now I'm > > > >> reading through StartingWithLift.pdf.
> > > >> You know how it is when learning something new. Just gotta connect > a > > > >> lot of dots. Unfortunately, the dots are versioned and I'm probably > > > >> gonna get burned mixing and matching Scala 2.8/Lift 2.0 and Scala > > > >> 2.7/Lift 1.0.
> > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > > "Lift" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > <liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252Bunsubscribe@googlegroup s.com>
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
What recommendations would people have for minimum RAM size for hosting lift in a VPS. I experimented at one point and found that it seemed to require quite a bit. But I may not have been doing it write. Are there any guides online for how to setup and optimize a VPS for lift? (or other servlets I guess they are probably the same)
-Arthur (sent from phone)
On Jun 30, 2010 10:52 PM, "David Pollak" <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Arthur <arthur.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I remember a long while...
Doing any work for GAE is a waste of time. Why?
GAE is slow and non-scalable, despite Google's claims (everyone I've spoken with that have tried to scale GAE apps have failed and gone elsewhere).
GAE locks you into a tremendously suboptimal storage mechanism.
GAE is free, but so is Stax and there are many inexpensive options including SliceHost. Next up, you've got Amazon EC2 and RackSpace.
So, I haven't found a good reason for anyone to use GAE. And if there's no good reason to use GAE, devoting a pile of resources to code around the GAE JVM incompatibilities (e.g., no new threads) seems like a waste.
> -Arthur
> On Jun 27, 11:41 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On...
> I experimented at one point and found that it seemed to require quite a > bit. But I may not have been doing it write. Are there any guides online for > how to setup and optimize a VPS for lift? (or other servlets I guess they > are probably the same)
> -Arthur (sent from phone)
> On Jun 30, 2010 10:52 PM, "David Pollak" <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Arthur <arthur.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I remember a long while...
> Doing any work for GAE is a waste of time. Why?
> GAE is slow and non-scalable, despite Google's claims (everyone I've spoken > with that have tried to scale GAE apps have failed and gone elsewhere).
> GAE locks you into a tremendously suboptimal storage mechanism.
> GAE is free, but so is Stax and there are many inexpensive options > including SliceHost. Next up, you've got Amazon EC2 and RackSpace.
> So, I haven't found a good reason for anyone to use GAE. And if there's no > good reason to use GAE, devoting a pile of resources to code around the GAE > JVM incompatibilities (e.g., no new threads) seems like a waste.
> > -Arthur
> > On Jun 27, 11:41 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > On...
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> > wrote:
>> That makes a lot of sense. I was just curious.
>> What recommendations would people have for minimum RAM size for hosting >> lift in a VPS.
> 64MB min. 128MB (so the JVM has 64MB heap+32MB other) is reasonable for > most apps that are going to have 10-20 users logged in at any time.
>> I experimented at one point and found that it seemed to require quite a >> bit. But I may not have been doing it write. Are there any guides online for >> how to setup and optimize a VPS for lift? (or other servlets I guess they >> are probably the same)
>> -Arthur (sent from phone)
>> On Jun 30, 2010 10:52 PM, "David Pollak" <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Arthur <arthur.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I remember a long while...
>> Doing any work for GAE is a waste of time. Why?
>> GAE is slow and non-scalable, despite Google's claims (everyone I've >> spoken with that have tried to scale GAE apps have failed and gone >> elsewhere).
>> GAE locks you into a tremendously suboptimal storage mechanism.
>> GAE is free, but so is Stax and there are many inexpensive options >> including SliceHost. Next up, you've got Amazon EC2 and RackSpace.
>> So, I haven't found a good reason for anyone to use GAE. And if there's >> no good reason to use GAE, devoting a pile of resources to code around the >> GAE JVM incompatibilities (e.g., no new threads) seems like a waste.
>> > -Arthur
>> > On Jun 27, 11:41 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > On...
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lift" group. >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
How much of that memory was PostgreSQL using? What were your VM memory allocations for heap, perm space, etc? I ask because I've seen PostgreSQL chew up quite a bit of memory if it's configured to do so.
Derek
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Fredrik Jonsson <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Interesting. I would appreciate if you had time to elaborate a bit on this.
> Our site seemed to need 768MB to run Ubuntu 9.10 Server with > PostgreSQL 8.4 and Jetty with a small Lift app on. (swap is not > allowed on the VPS host).
> Could we do a better setup?
> -Fredrik
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:32 PM, David Pollak > <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> > > wrote:
> >> That makes a lot of sense. I was just curious.
> >> What recommendations would people have for minimum RAM size for hosting > >> lift in a VPS.
> > 64MB min. 128MB (so the JVM has 64MB heap+32MB other) is reasonable for > > most apps that are going to have 10-20 users logged in at any time.
> >> I experimented at one point and found that it seemed to require quite a > >> bit. But I may not have been doing it write. Are there any guides online > for > >> how to setup and optimize a VPS for lift? (or other servlets I guess > they > >> are probably the same)
> >> -Arthur (sent from phone)
> >> On Jun 30, 2010 10:52 PM, "David Pollak" <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com
> >> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Arthur <arthur.pet...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> >> > I remember a long while...
> >> Doing any work for GAE is a waste of time. Why?
> >> GAE is slow and non-scalable, despite Google's claims (everyone I've > >> spoken with that have tried to scale GAE apps have failed and gone > >> elsewhere).
> >> GAE locks you into a tremendously suboptimal storage mechanism.
> >> GAE is free, but so is Stax and there are many inexpensive options > >> including SliceHost. Next up, you've got Amazon EC2 and RackSpace.
> >> So, I haven't found a good reason for anyone to use GAE. And if there's > >> no good reason to use GAE, devoting a pile of resources to code around > the > >> GAE JVM incompatibilities (e.g., no new threads) seems like a waste.
> >> > -Arthur
> >> > On Jun 27, 11:41 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > On...
> >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > >> "Lift" group. > >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > >> For more options, visit this group at > >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Lift" group. > > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
I would also love to see the options, container and configuration used to get lift to run in 128MB. I have attempted it and I had trouble when I was running it in even 300MB let alone 128MB. I'm sure I was doing something wrong, but I don't know what.
-Arthur
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Derek Chen-Becker
<dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote: > How much of that memory was PostgreSQL using? What were your VM memory > allocations for heap, perm space, etc? I ask because I've seen PostgreSQL > chew up quite a bit of memory if it's configured to do so.
> Derek
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Fredrik Jonsson <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>> Interesting. I would appreciate if you had time to elaborate a bit on >> this.
>> Our site seemed to need 768MB to run Ubuntu 9.10 Server with >> PostgreSQL 8.4 and Jetty with a small Lift app on. (swap is not >> allowed on the VPS host).
>> Could we do a better setup?
>> -Fredrik
>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:32 PM, David Pollak >> <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> >> > wrote:
>> >> That makes a lot of sense. I was just curious.
>> >> What recommendations would people have for minimum RAM size for hosting >> >> lift in a VPS.
>> > 64MB min. 128MB (so the JVM has 64MB heap+32MB other) is reasonable for >> > most apps that are going to have 10-20 users logged in at any time.
>> >> I experimented at one point and found that it seemed to require quite a >> >> bit. But I may not have been doing it write. Are there any guides >> >> online for >> >> how to setup and optimize a VPS for lift? (or other servlets I guess >> >> they >> >> are probably the same)
>> >> -Arthur (sent from phone)
>> >> On Jun 30, 2010 10:52 PM, "David Pollak" >> >> <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Arthur <arthur.pet...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:
>> >> > I remember a long while...
>> >> Doing any work for GAE is a waste of time. Why?
>> >> GAE is slow and non-scalable, despite Google's claims (everyone I've >> >> spoken with that have tried to scale GAE apps have failed and gone >> >> elsewhere).
>> >> GAE locks you into a tremendously suboptimal storage mechanism.
>> >> GAE is free, but so is Stax and there are many inexpensive options >> >> including SliceHost. Next up, you've got Amazon EC2 and RackSpace.
>> >> So, I haven't found a good reason for anyone to use GAE. And if >> >> there's >> >> no good reason to use GAE, devoting a pile of resources to code around >> >> the >> >> GAE JVM incompatibilities (e.g., no new threads) seems like a waste.
>> >> > -Arthur
>> >> > On Jun 27, 11:41 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > > On...
>> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> Groups >> >> "Lift" group. >> >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> >> For more options, visit this group at >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups >> > "Lift" group. >> > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> > For more options, visit this group at >> > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lift" group. >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> wrote: > I would also love to see the options, container and configuration used > to get lift to run in 128MB. I have attempted it and I had trouble > when I was running it in even 300MB let alone 128MB. I'm sure I was > doing something wrong, but I don't know what.
> -Arthur
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Derek Chen-Becker > <dchenbec...@gmail.com> wrote: >> How much of that memory was PostgreSQL using? What were your VM memory >> allocations for heap, perm space, etc? I ask because I've seen PostgreSQL >> chew up quite a bit of memory if it's configured to do so.
>> Derek
>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Fredrik Jonsson <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>>> Interesting. I would appreciate if you had time to elaborate a bit on >>> this.
>>> Our site seemed to need 768MB to run Ubuntu 9.10 Server with >>> PostgreSQL 8.4 and Jetty with a small Lift app on. (swap is not >>> allowed on the VPS host).
>>> Could we do a better setup?
>>> -Fredrik
>>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:32 PM, David Pollak >>> <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> >>> > wrote:
>>> >> That makes a lot of sense. I was just curious.
>>> >> What recommendations would people have for minimum RAM size for hosting >>> >> lift in a VPS.
>>> > 64MB min. 128MB (so the JVM has 64MB heap+32MB other) is reasonable for >>> > most apps that are going to have 10-20 users logged in at any time.
>>> >> I experimented at one point and found that it seemed to require quite a >>> >> bit. But I may not have been doing it write. Are there any guides >>> >> online for >>> >> how to setup and optimize a VPS for lift? (or other servlets I guess >>> >> they >>> >> are probably the same)
>>> >> -Arthur (sent from phone)
>>> >> On Jun 30, 2010 10:52 PM, "David Pollak" >>> >> <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote:
>>> >> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Arthur <arthur.pet...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > I remember a long while...
>>> >> Doing any work for GAE is a waste of time. Why?
>>> >> GAE is slow and non-scalable, despite Google's claims (everyone I've >>> >> spoken with that have tried to scale GAE apps have failed and gone >>> >> elsewhere).
>>> >> GAE locks you into a tremendously suboptimal storage mechanism.
>>> >> GAE is free, but so is Stax and there are many inexpensive options >>> >> including SliceHost. Next up, you've got Amazon EC2 and RackSpace.
>>> >> So, I haven't found a good reason for anyone to use GAE. And if >>> >> there's >>> >> no good reason to use GAE, devoting a pile of resources to code around >>> >> the >>> >> GAE JVM incompatibilities (e.g., no new threads) seems like a waste.
>>> >> > -Arthur
>>> >> > On Jun 27, 11:41 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> > > On...
>>> >> -- >>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> >> Groups >>> >> "Lift" group. >>> >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >>> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>> >> For more options, visit this group at >>> >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>>> > -- >>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> > Groups >>> > "Lift" group. >>> > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>> > For more options, visit this group at >>> > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Lift" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lift" group. >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
Virt is what the kernel allows that process to use, but Res is the actual amount of RAM used. The total seems too high though, but I suspect that may be because you dont have any swap defined. Are you able to at least setup a swap file if you cant use an actual partition?
Also, what jvm options are you using? If you are using defaults, they scale with the total mem I believe.
I think thats all correct, but writing this from my phone so unable to doublecheck.
On 2010-07-02 5:07 PM, "Fredrik Jonsson" <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
To clarify, total should be Res, Buffers, and Cache. The total might be using Virt instead of Res due to the kernel not having swap to fall back on.
On 2010-07-02 6:29 PM, "Derek Williams" <de...@nebvin.ca> wrote:
Virt is what the kernel allows that process to use, but Res is the actual amount of RAM used. The total seems too high though, but I suspect that may be because you dont have any swap defined. Are you able to at least setup a swap file if you cant use an actual partition?
Also, what jvm options are you using? If you are using defaults, they scale with the total mem I believe.
I think thats all correct, but writing this from my phone so unable to doublecheck.
> On 2010-07-02 5:07 PM, "Fredrik Jonsson" <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> These are the top...
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> wrote: > I would also love t...
--
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Derek Williams <de...@nebvin.ca> wrote: > To clarify, total should be Res, Buffers, and Cache. The total might be > using Virt instead of Res due to the kernel not having swap to fall back on.
> On 2010-07-02 6:29 PM, "Derek Williams" <de...@nebvin.ca> wrote:
> Virt is what the kernel allows that process to use, but Res is the actual > amount of RAM used. The total seems too high though, but I suspect that may > be because you dont have any swap defined. Are you able to at least setup a > swap file if you cant use an actual partition?
> Also, what jvm options are you using? If you are using defaults, they scale > with the total mem I believe.
> I think thats all correct, but writing this from my phone so unable to > doublecheck.
> > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> > wrote: > > I would also love t...
> --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to t...
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Derek Williams <de...@nebvin.ca> wrote:
>> To clarify, total should be Res, Buffers, and Cache. The total might be >> using Virt instead of Res due to the kernel not having swap to fall back on.
> To deploy, please > download http://github.com/dpp/lift-samples/raw/master/jetty_instance.tgz > and set the ram_size file to 64M and put your Lift app in webapps/root.war > and run "start_prod.sh" > That'll consume about 96MB of total RAM. You should be able to run the rest > of your system (RDBMS, OS, etc.) in the remaining 32MB. > http://demo.liftweb.net serves a peak of 10 pages per second and typically > has 500 sessions and it's running with 256MB of heap.
>> On 2010-07-02 6:29 PM, "Derek Williams" <de...@nebvin.ca> wrote:
>> Virt is what the kernel allows that process to use, but Res is the actual >> amount of RAM used. The total seems too high though, but I suspect that may >> be because you dont have any swap defined. Are you able to at least setup a >> swap file if you cant use an actual partition?
>> Also, what jvm options are you using? If you are using defaults, they >> scale with the total mem I believe.
>> I think thats all correct, but writing this from my phone so unable to >> doublecheck.
>> > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> >> > wrote:
>> > I would also love t...
>> --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups "Lift" group.
>> To post to t...
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lift" group. >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
With 64mb heap jetty reports 119mb RES, postgres about 35mb RES and rest of OS 10-20mb RES. I conclude that 128mb with some tweaking or on the safe side 256 mb would be sufficient.
However since our VPS host (they use OpenVZ) doesn't allow swap top reports 450mb total memory usage which forces us to buy 512 or even 768 mb to be on the safe side.
BR -Fredrik
PS. switched to nginx asweel, thank you for pointing me to it.
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Fredrik Jonsson <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you! I'll try it out and get back with my findings. I like this community!
> -Fredrik
> On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 12:29 AM, David Pollak > <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Derek Williams <de...@nebvin.ca> wrote:
>>> To clarify, total should be Res, Buffers, and Cache. The total might be >>> using Virt instead of Res due to the kernel not having swap to fall back on.
>> To deploy, please >> download http://github.com/dpp/lift-samples/raw/master/jetty_instance.tgz >> and set the ram_size file to 64M and put your Lift app in webapps/root.war >> and run "start_prod.sh" >> That'll consume about 96MB of total RAM. You should be able to run the rest >> of your system (RDBMS, OS, etc.) in the remaining 32MB. >> http://demo.liftweb.net serves a peak of 10 pages per second and typically >> has 500 sessions and it's running with 256MB of heap.
>>> On 2010-07-02 6:29 PM, "Derek Williams" <de...@nebvin.ca> wrote:
>>> Virt is what the kernel allows that process to use, but Res is the actual >>> amount of RAM used. The total seems too high though, but I suspect that may >>> be because you dont have any swap defined. Are you able to at least setup a >>> swap file if you cant use an actual partition?
>>> Also, what jvm options are you using? If you are using defaults, they >>> scale with the total mem I believe.
>>> I think thats all correct, but writing this from my phone so unable to >>> doublecheck.
>>> > On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> >>> > wrote:
>>> > I would also love t...
>>> --
>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> > Groups "Lift" group.
>>> To post to t...
>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Lift" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Lift" group. >> To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
Thanks for posting your results. Its quite illuminating (though it does leave me wondering why you would need swap or lots of extra RAM. What is soaking up the extra? I wonder.)
Just in case and one else had this confusion about the free service on Stax: free hosted apps hybernate after 24 hours HOWEVER this does not mean that an admin needs to poke it or anything. Any HTTP request to the app will wake it up. It just means that the first request after 24 hrs of non-use will take an extra few seconds while the VPS resumes from hibernation.
-Arthur (sent from phone)
On Jul 7, 2010 5:44 PM, "Fredrik Jonsson" <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
A final memory report if anyone is interested.
With 64mb heap jetty reports 119mb RES, postgres about 35mb RES and rest of OS 10-20mb RES. I conclude that 128mb with some tweaking or on the safe side 256 mb would be sufficient.
However since our VPS host (they use OpenVZ) doesn't allow swap top reports 450mb total memory usage which forces us to buy 512 or even 768 mb to be on the safe side.
BR -Fredrik
PS. switched to nginx asweel, thank you for pointing me to it.
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Fredrik Jonsson <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> wrote: > Thanks for posting your results. Its quite illuminating (though it does > leave me wondering why you would need swap or lots of extra RAM. What is > soaking up the extra? I wonder.)
> Just in case and one else had this confusion about the free service on > Stax: free hosted apps hybernate after 24 hours HOWEVER this does not mean > that an admin needs to poke it or anything. Any HTTP request to the app will > wake it up. It just means that the first request after 24 hrs of non-use > will take an extra few seconds while the VPS resumes from hibernation.
> With 64mb heap jetty reports 119mb RES, postgres about 35mb RES and > rest of OS 10-20mb RES. I conclude that 128mb with some tweaking or on > the safe side 256 mb would be sufficient.
> However since our VPS host (they use OpenVZ) doesn't allow swap top > reports 450mb total memory usage which forces us to buy 512 or even > 768 mb to be on the safe side.
> BR > -Fredrik
> PS. switched to nginx asweel, thank you for pointing me to it.
> On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Fredrik Jonsson <fredrik.jo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Thank you! I'll ...
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
They claim like 5 I think, but a quick test with the "basic eclipse app" (the one in the maven achetype) was more like 20 or maybe even 30. But that only happens the your app gets 0 hits in 24 hours I think.
-Arthur (sent from phone)
On Jul 7, 2010 11:05 PM, "Naftoli Gugenheim" <naftoli...@gmail.com> wrote:
Interesting. What kind of "few seconds"? Like 3? Or 20?
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Arthur Peters <a...@singingwizard.org> wrote:
> > Thanks for posting your results. Its quite illuminating (though it does > leave me wondering why y... > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > > To post ...
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post ...
