Greetings!

In all cases, the environment is one of using OpenInsight (Oengine) as an "Application Server" to support a web server running Apache2.

http://thedce.com

Is there any benefit (or downside) to running Oengine on winXP 64bit vs 32bit?

If the Web server and Oengine run on the same machine (with the LH files) is there any benefit to running oecgi2 (and the OEngineServer/OESocketServer run as a Windows Service)?

What might the benefits be?

Any thoughts, opinions?

Thank you and Have fun!

Paxton

Paul,

I not sure there is any benefit of running on a 64 bit machine as OEngine is 32 bit and will have to run "emulated".

As for running the engine on the same box as the webserver the benefits are ease of setup and "perhaps" less overhead in communicating the results back to the webserver. The downsides, IMHO, are significant on the security front. It means you have to give your webserver access to your LH data.

These are just my opinions…

HTH,

John

John,

Thanks for your response. I agree on the 64bit question, but I thought I'd ask in case someone had found a benefit.

On the second question, the question is whether to continue with oecgi or to use oecgi2 (and the OEngineServer/OESocketServer Windows service) on the same machine. ( I can move the LH files to another machine using UD4.5 if desired.)

It seems to me using oecgi2 adds overhead, not needed.

I understand how oecgi2 gives me the ability to run Oengine on a different machine than Apache.

Have fun,

Paxton

Another benefit of using OECGI2 and the engineserver is the ability to launch multiple engines. So if an engine is busy it will not block request from other users. To my knowledge OECGI does not offer this capability.

HTH,

John

Another benefit of using OECGI2 and the engineserver is the ability to launch multiple engines. So if an engine is busy it will not block request from other users. To my knowledge OECGI does not offer this capability.

OECGI will launch an engine per request if createparam=1 and shutdownsessions=1. On a busy server, this means multiple engines will be open at once. Each engine services one request, then closes.

However, OECGI2 is the recommended tool as of now. Yes, there is the overhead of running a java OEngineserver component too. However the OEngineServer reuses engines once it starts them and queues requests if all engines are busy. The overhead of continually starting and stopping engines is removed. In practice, OECGI2 sites perform better than OECGI sites. The latest versions of OECGI2 support file uploads too; OECGI does not support file uploads.

Bob,

Thanks for the clarification as I knew I could launch multiple engines with OECGI. The ability to queue requests I think is the clincher, and your comments indicate even with lots of licenses for engines, oecgi2 will be better even with the overhead. As you know, I don't do things just because they are popular, like to understand the underpinnings.

Will work on setting up some in the lab now!

Paxton

View this thread on the Works forum...