[albatross-users] Is Albatross right for my app?

[George Pauly]

I'm working on a stateful ajax/comet app. This involves maintaining
state for the client browser app over a long period with many
interprocess communications to a server daemon. Ideally, this would be
runnable on a shared hosting ISP running *nix/Apache. This might
involve a cgi intermediate that plugs into the daemon.

Albatross' server daemon sounds like it might help, but I don't think I
need all the template/page/macro parts.

Any advice appreciated.

If the advice is to develop a custom daemon app, why did Albatross go
with sockets instead of named pipes for interprocess communication?

Thanks,

George

[Andrew McNamara]

Post by George Pauly
I'm working on a stateful ajax/comet app. This involves maintaining
state for the client browser app over a long period with many
interprocess communications to a server daemon. Ideally, this would be
runnable on a shared hosting ISP running *nix/Apache. This might
involve a cgi intermediate that plugs into the daemon.
Albatross' server daemon sounds like it might help, but I don't think I
need all the template/page/macro parts.

I think Albatross is somewhat tangential to what you want. While people
have written AJAX apps that work in conjunction with an Albatross
application, they're typically hybrids (part CGI, part AJAX), whereas
it sounds like yours is purely AJAX.

Post by George Pauly
If the advice is to develop a custom daemon app, why did Albatross go
with sockets instead of named pipes for interprocess communication?

Using sockets for the session daemon allows us to do things like have
multiple load-balanced web servers using one session server, so no
matter which web server the client hits, that web server has access to
the current session. If the communication between the application and
the session daemon was via a named pipe, both would have to reside on
the same machine.