Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!rfenney.slip.netcom.com!user
From: rfenney@netcom.com (Robert J. Fenney)
Subject: Re: Smalltalk Servers
Message-ID: <rfenney-300196105708@rfenney.slip.netcom.com>
Followup-To: comp.lang.smalltalk
Sender: netnews@mork.netcom.com
Nntp-Posting-Host: rfenney.slip.netcom.com
Organization: FenTek
References: <310DA3CD.70D3@sulzer.de>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 19:00:32 GMT
Lines: 32

In article <310DA3CD.70D3@sulzer.de>, Alfred Peisl <peisl@sulzer.de> wrote:

> Hi ,
> after developing distributed applications with VisualWorks as front-end, 
> we are now entering projects with the need for really long living and 
> stable server daemons. 
> 
> These servers shall implement complex policies within a car assembly line 
> application and typically serve some hundred clients by the means of TCP 
> and UDP. Since the policy is really complex, we would like to implement 
> the servers with headless VisualWorks and not acc++embler ;-). 
> 
> We did not experience any major problems with VW20 servers in 
> non-critical applications with smaller workload.
> 
> We are very interested to learn about experiences with VisualWorks as 
> server platform in production environments. So anybody feel invited to 
> comment. 
> 
> Areas of immediate interest are:
> - possible degradation in response time after running for a while 
> - possible memory leaks in the VM
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Alfred Peisl <100126,207@compuserve.com>
> Stefan Derdak <sderdak@bmw.de>

I am interested in this as well. I would also be interested in anyone
experience in interfacing with an ORB to form the back bone of the server.

Robert
