Re: WebAdverts alternative

From: Jim Reardon <jim_at_amusive.com>
Date: Tue 28 Nov 2000 14:17:48 -0500

MICHAEL MARTINEZ <Michael_at_xenite.org> WROTE:
> Database-driven Web sites in general tend to be
> SLOWER than old-fashiond hard-coded file-intrinsic
> Web sites. I have not evaluated any ad delivery
> systems which use a database, however, so you've
> piqued my curiosity.

Ok, you caught me in an over-generalization!

Database driven servers will be faster or slower -- it
depends on how many impressions you serve. The short
of it is there IS overhead to having a database server
running on your system, so that adds in initially, but
eventually the processing time and memory you save
through the ad delivery (they do tend to be much
faster and much less memory-intensive) *eventually*
makes up for that overhead.

The main advantage in speed is that MySQL (I believe)
loads and keeps various data in memory -- data which
are used often. So this leads to less disk IO (which
results in much, much faster return of data) along with
less chance of corruption.

Comparing MySQL driven AdCycle to WebAdverts, I've
noticed a definite speed increase and more reliability
in data... but your results may vary!

Jim Reardon <jim_at_amusive.com> 815-744-3119
what do you want for free? http://www.freecenter.com/
free forums, polls, and more! http://www.sitegadgets.com/?sig





Received on Tue Nov 28 2000 - 13:17:48 CST