NYCPHP Meetup

[David Sklar]

> From: Kyle Tuskey [mailto:ktuskey at exostream.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 12:20 AM
>
> You can scale LAMP (minus MySQL which is barely a database) to some
> degree, but it isn't really the best way to approach it.  PHP was not
> built to be an enterprise language.  The lack of the N-Tier model makes
> it great for most sites, but true enterprise level needs would be better
> approached with J2EE or .Net.  Using .Net or J2EE (Java) will make the
> final solution much easier to use, manage, scale, and deploy.  Though
> the word "enterprise" is thrown around too much and often isn't used
> accurately, applications that truly are enterprise do need to take into
> account a lot of the advantages of the N-Tier model.  PHP has XML-RPC to
> all remote calls in a distributed architecture if I remember correctly,
> but it isn't very efficient.  For instance, Java's RMI (Remote Method
> Invocation) implementation is much more robust for this purpose.  If you
> must use PHP for an enterprise solution, use a strong RDBMS (MySQL is
> definitely not in this category) and some form of load balancing or
> clustering as opposed to an attempted distributed architecture w/ PHP.

So, Kyle, what is "true enterprise level," then? A billion pageviews per
month? The 800B PV/month Ophir cited at CCI works out to about 300/second,
and I presume that doesn't include images or other static objects.

Tell me, where is the point that MySQL breaks down? Traffic? Functionality?
I admit, MySQL doesn't have, say, the World's Greatest parallel hot-failover
technology, but I don't think anyone would classify Oracle's efforts in this
regard in that way either.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for using the right tool for the job, and MySQL
or PHP or Linux or Apache aren't each the right tool for every job. But if
you're going to insist that PHP or MySQL has problems, please point out
actual problems, instead of vague assertions.

Thanks,

David