As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
What could be the optimum programming languages (Perl, PHP, Java, Python or something else) to implement server (multi-threaded?) using tcp/ip socket serving like 1000's of clients with the streaming data?
Using C/C++ with libevent, we were streaming 800mbps sustained to 30,000 active connections (two four core processors, 7 threads each running one event loop). Erlang is a reasonable choice too. It is far safer against programmer errors. But it cannot keep pace to event driven c/c++ ... been there and had to rewrite (hint, erlang is written in c).
Python with Twisted Framework
www.twistedmatrix.com
Java with XSocket or Apache Mina Frameworks (which Red5 Flash/video streaming media sever based on)
mina.apache.org
xsocket.sourceforge.net
They all are multithreaded , easy and very powerful.
Erlang of course :-) But then again, your requirements are not clear ;-)
It was designed from ground up to handle multi-threaded networking applications. It's origin comes from Ericsson: they use Erlang in (some of) their networking products.
This doesn't precisely answer this question, but it will help answer future questions. The problem of connecting thousands of clients to the same server is known as the c10k problem. There you will find lots of answers and helpful information about setting up that kind of server.
based on the sparse information given I would say either c or erlang
What language are you most familiar with? What kind problem set do you have? A lot depends on these questions. Most popular programming languages have good documentation for doing socket programmimng. It depends on tastes. I prefer the C programming language. I'm sure some people will also chime to offer Erlang as a good language to use. Again, it depends.
Apple already sells an optimum multi-threaded streaming media server.
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/streamingserver/
You might be able to buy it and save yourself a lot of work.
I can't tell from your question what you're trying to do, but buying a solution is usually optimal.
Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
We want a high performance testing tool for a distributed scenario
We want to collect data from clients and from server (memory usage, cpu usage, response time, .net calls etc).
Most of our applications are using .Net 4.0 or Classic Asp.
We have 4 servers. We want 1 controller and three agents working together for testing, collecting data.
What's the best tool for this scenario?
ps: We've tried Visual studio 2012 ultimate and it seems promising. I don't know other tools that fits the scenario.
Give Load Tester a try: http://www.webperformance.com/load-testing/ (disclaimer: I work there). It has a monitoring agent that will run on your Windows servers to collect the metrics you mentioned and a lot more. It also collects client-side metrics such as page load time. The LITE version is free and can run simple tests with unlimited users.
Take a look at Rational Performance Tester. I was about to purchase a license for one of our projects but didn't push through for reasons not related to the software. Looked promising back then.
I would split things up to keep it simple.
First I would check what the average requests per seconds is when using your servers to generate load. For that there is a small tool included in Apache Http Server called ab.exe. It's easy to setup to generate requests.
If you think that you get acceptable response times all is well.
If not, use something like Jetbrains DotTrace (in your app) to collect data when generating load from one server.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
I'm in the process of switching from certain open-source technologies to ASP.net for building web applications (including some complex CRM and ERP tools as well as simple blog-like apps.) So far I've used MSSQL in the learning process but the more time I spend looking into infrastructure costs, the less impressed I am with MSSQL. (Windows Server / IIS on the other hand is relatively inexpensive and not a concern.) I've used MySQL in the past and feel comfortable with it.
Please provide me examples of situations, if any, where given the choice, MSSQL would justify its costs compared to MySQL. I realize there are reasons to use MSSQL such as the quality of integration out-of-the-box with Visual Studio, etc -- however I'm more interested in this from the stand-point of the raw costs of running servers. For example, if you can tell me something like "the license cost of MSSQL with one physical server will be lower than the hardware costs of running multiple servers with MySQL while providing the same performance in situation X, Y, and Z," I'd love to hear it. Perhaps there are reasons why it's cheaper to scale MSSQL or perhaps it is just a lot more efficient. People make the decision to choose MSSQL every day and I'd like to hear the reasons that pertain to cost.
I also welcome any answers that prove the costs to be negligible.
if your MySQL will scale much more than the limitations of Express, than perhaps you shouldn't use MySQL at all.
SQL Server is licensed Per CAL or Per CPU Socket(most expensive). There are also cheaper versions with fewer features but still fully functional, namely Web edition and Workgroup edition.
If money is your sole concern here, I encourage you to check the edition compare and see the one that best satisfy your needs then check the licensing info
Why not just use Sql Express? There are few limits (1gb ram, 4gb db) but besides that you can get the management tools for it, etc.
Voila - no cost : )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL_Server_Express
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
This is really a 2 part question. First of all, I just wanted to know how common is asp.net in the real world?
Secondly, I just want to know what are the read world scenario regarding scaling a asp.net site? http://highscalability.com/ almost never talked about the asp.net stack. Does anyone have any reason article that talks about how to scale an asp.net app?
Thanks.
I don't have numbers but based on the number of .net questions on so I'd say it's pretty common For your second question seehttp://highscalability.com/plentyoffish-architecture
MySpace uses ASP.NET (source). A lot of big sites do. I would ignore the Plenty of Fish example though. From my recollection of stories I've read about it, they're just using HttpHandlers for output, skipping the Webforms stuff altogether. You could probably get Webforms to scale though if you absolutely had to. Most popular frameworks can handle high load, it just depends on the code and who's writing it. Anyone can program a site in any framework that won't scale but not vice versa.
As for how to scale, the biggest thing is caching, caching, caching. All big sites cache extensively. Facebook has thousands of servers just for caching. That's just a start though.
Yes asp.net is used in the real world. I have been following how Stackoverflow has been created since I first heard about it over a year ago and have taken away a lot of lessons. Following how stackoverflow will scale in future as their demand grows is pretty interesting and they are making a lot of their information public. Plus the podcasts are hilarious :)
Its hard to say how widespread ASP.NET is in the world but I think it is very widespread compared to PHP, Java and other server technologies. And I'm convinced that ASP.NET is as scalable as anything else you'll try.
If you wan't a starting point to read about ASP.NET performance you could take a look at chapter 6 of the P&P book "Improving .NET Application Performance and Scalability". It's from 2004 so it might be a little outdated.
To give a couple of examples of high traffic sites running ASP.NET you just have to look at http://www.microsoft.com/ or https://stackoverflow.com/. if your site is smaller than these (and it probably is) scalability wont be you biggest concern. You should probably be more concerned about writing maintainable code.
Plenty of Fish with about 1,2 billion pageviews/month
Over 9000.
Realistically I've run into many high traffic websites StackOverflow as an example that use ASP.NET
One thing that is useful for high scalability is the ability to add more servers if needed and still be able to maintain your current session using various ASP.NET session state technologies.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I understand the basics of networking such as Lan and stuff. I know what many of the protocols are and how to build a client/server socket program in C. But what I really want is a very good understanding of how networks actually work. Not only from a programming aspect but also from a application aspect. I am looking for some material(preferably a book) which will give me a very good foundation to go off of. I am in the middle of wanting to be a programmer or a UNIX admin, so I really should learn and know how to apply networking fundamentals.
Does any such a concise resource exist? Would it be better going the more academic route by buying a networking book(such as those from Tanenbaum or Kurose), or is it better to go the It route possibly looking into network admin text or certification books.
Thank you all so much.
Here is the way I would recommend:
Learn how Internet Evolved, this would give you the reason why they needed it
Learn the different protocols - HTTP, telnet, ssh esp the secure ones SFTP, HTTPS etc
Learn what are sockets and types of sockets
Learn how you can do socket programming. I suggest you to use Python sockets to do the programming
Learn the TCP/IP network stack. That would be beneficial
Learn how routing works, this is important for learning
Try to have a sound knowledge of topics like DNS, it is very important
Get VirtualBox and install various OS and try to internetwork them. Play around with the networking stack of the OS.
The late Richard Stevens' book is a masterpiece -- much more practical and immediately applicable than Tanenbaum's (haven't studied Kurose). Btw, by the same author, I just as warmly recommend the books in the "TCP/IP Illustrated" series, and Advanced Programming in the Unix Environment -- few books are more crucial to the wanna-be "programmer or Unix admin", save perhaps ESR's!
Its kind of unclear to me what exactly you're looking for, so I'm just going to throw this out there:
Start networking your own stuff together. Create a LAN. Go figure out how to create and manage a Linux firewall instead of a consumer one. Install Active Directory just for grins. Run your own DHCP and DNS servers on that Active Directory server.
Once you get that far, if you're still interested, start thinking about how you would plan your LAN if you had 500 computers. Learn about Virtual LANs (VLANs).
I think networking in particular is a great place to start tinkering because A) no one gets hurt, B) its mostly free.
Whoa .. networking is a seriously big field. To truly understand everything will require a PHD, or several PHD's.
Here are some of the aspects I think you need to learn.
1) You need to learn the history of networking. Many of the policies built into protocols were made due to limitations of the time. Learn the history of protocols to learn the "Why" of how it works.
2) Programming is an excellent source of knowledge on how a network works on the lowest level. Learn to write some socket code in C. BSD sockets is a good place to start. You can find alot of references for BSD sockets on the Internet.
3) *nix commands offer a wealth of knowledge on configuring and managing networks. Good network admins know a lot of tricks on how to build complicated networking operations using just the most basic network tools. The GNU networking tools is a good place to start.
4) If your up to it, there are several certificates like MCSE and CCNA which have modules on networking. These papers can be useful to gain knowledge on a particular type of network. I learnt alot about windows NT domain models from sitting for the MCSE paper even though i never really played around with domains much.
There are more aspects. Ask yourself, which do you like more ?
a bit of personal experience.
I have worked as a software developer for 10 years. I am also the "unpaid" network guru in my office. Somehow , i have to wear more than 1 hat as a developer because networking is part of the software i work on.
For fundamentals, you may want to get the W. Richard Stevens Classic, TCP/IP Illustrated, and possibly his other books as well. There will not be any more of them, either.
It sounds like the kind of understanding you're looking for is the kind that can only really be reached through experience. Each and every person will have a different way of looking at things, depending on what makes sense to them -- explanations can help, but there's no substitute for learning by actually solving problems.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I am currently looking at a distributed cache solution.
If money was not an issue, which would you recommend?
www.scaleoutsoftware.com
ncache
memcacheddotnet
MS Velocity
Out of your selection I've only ever attempted to use memcached, and even then it wasn't the C#/.NET libraries.
However memcached technology is fairly well proven, just look at the sites that use it:
...The system is used by several very large, well-known sites including YouTube, LiveJournal, Slashdot, Wikipedia, SourceForge, ShowClix, GameFAQs, Facebook, Digg, Twitter, Fotolog, BoardGameGeek, NYTimes.com, deviantART, Jamendo, Kayak, VxV, ThePirateBay and Netlog.
I don't really see a reason to look at the other solution's.
Good Luck,
Brian G.
One thing that people typically forget when evaluating solutions is dedicated support.
If you go with memcached then you'll get none, because you're using completely open source software that is not backed by any vendor. Yes, the core platform is well tested by virtue of age, but the C# client libraries are probably much less so. And yes, you'll probably get some help on forums and the like, but there is no guarantee responses will be fast, and no guarantee you'll get any responses at all.
I don't know what the support for NCache or the ScaleOut cache is like, but it's something that's worth finding out before choosing them. I've dealt with many companies for support over the last few years and the support is often outsourced to people who don't even work at the company (with no chance of getting to the people who do) and this means no chance of getting quality of timely support. On the other hand I've also dealt with companies who'll escalate serious issues to the right people, fix important issues very fast, and ship you a personal patch.
One of those companies is Microsoft, which is one of the reasons that we use their software as our platform. If you have a production issue, then you can rely on their support. So my inclination would be to go with Velocity largely on this basis.
Possible the most important thing though, whichever cache you choose, is to abstract it behind your own interface (e.g. ICache) which will allow you to evaluate a number of them without holding up the rest of the development process. This means that even if your initial decision turns out not to work for you, you can switch it without breaking much of the application.
(Note: I'm assuming here that all caches have sufficient features to support what you need from them, and that all caches have sufficient and broadly similar performance. This may not be a valid assumption, in which case you'll need to provide more detail in your question as to why it isn't).
You could also add Oracle Coherence to your list. It has both .NET and Java APIs.
From microsoft : App fabric
Commerical : NCache
Open source : RIAK
We tried a couple in the end we use the SQL session provider for asp.net/mvc yes there is the overhead of the connection to the DB but our DB server is very fast and the web farm has loads of capacity so not an issue.
Very interested in RIAK has .net client and used by Yahoo - can be scaled to many manu server