Until node.js makes their home page intelligible to a novice, none of this matters.
This is happening.
Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
11–20 of 22 posts
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#12"We’ll fork it. And fork it hard. Fork it like it’s never been forked before"
I love this comment. I really enjoy node.js but have never really paid attention to Joyent, until now. They have immense respect from me (not that it counts for much) for their candid response and their push for SSJS and node.js
Thank you and it does count.
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
I admit both of them have lots to say about SSJS or even SS-anything. Still I can't understand Bruno's sentiment towards thread-per-request approach, considering that he's talking about the Node here. Node.js is all about a simplicity of evented, single thread design. If someone thinks this "worse is better" approach went too far in this case, why to use Node at all? There are tons of good thread-based solutions nowa…
The issue is that a single V8 thread in Node.js could be handling the event loop for thousands of clients. A process crash here could cause a mini thundering-herd when all the users attempt to reconnect at the same time. So his question is not baseless - the solution is to have a VM that rarely crashes. n.b. Erlang also hard-crashes when it can't allocate memory. This hasn't hurt its reputation for reliability.
Yes, Bruno's fundamental point is that "desktop" language VMs will just end a process when there's memory allocation errors. So basically there has to be real means to instrument and error handling has to be robust, he's correct in this assertion.
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#14I guess Bruno's basic point is: V8 is client-side. That's where Google's thrust is; that's what they're concentrating on. But SSJS has some unique issues, which aren't necessarily issues on the client side.
So it's a natural question to ask if Yahoo, as a company, are thinking of investing millions of dollars (in terms of manpower) on node.js .
Jason's response seemed more like "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it". Which is perfectly reasonable (and the norm) in startup-world; but large, established companies with their BCPs and contingency-planning and long product lifecycles don't usually think that way.
IMHO, if Yahoo is planning on going all-out for SSJS, they should develop some in-house expertise on V8 so that they can fork it for internal use and not have to wait on Google.
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#15"We’ll fork it. And fork it hard. Fork it like it’s never been forked before"
I love this comment. I really enjoy node.js but have never really paid attention to Joyent, until now. They have immense respect from me (not that it counts for much) for their candid response and their push for SSJS and node.js
Why does that quote give you more respect for Joyent?
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#16Until node.js makes their home page intelligible to a novice, none of this matters.
I think this is a valid complaint. Sure, it looks "clean" and has some incredibly simplistic examples, but beyond that it's very much an alpha release.
Of course, once we get to the aforementioned 1.0 release with a stable API, things will get a lot better, either from the node guys or third-party guides.
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#17Until node.js makes their home page intelligible to a novice, none of this matters.
That's a good thing!
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
I admit both of them have lots to say about SSJS or even SS-anything. Still I can't understand Bruno's sentiment towards thread-per-request approach, considering that he's talking about the Node here. Node.js is all about a simplicity of evented, single thread design. If someone thinks this "worse is better" approach went too far in this case, why to use Node at all? There are tons of good thread-based solutions nowa…
The issue is that a single V8 thread in Node.js could be handling the event loop for thousands of clients. A process crash here could cause a mini thundering-herd when all the users attempt to reconnect at the same time. So his question is not baseless - the solution is to have a VM that rarely crashes. n.b. Erlang also hard-crashes when it can't allocate memory. This hasn't hurt its reputation for reliability.
A process crash will cause the same problem for thread-per-connection server. There is essentially no difference in stability between thread-per-connection and event-loop based servers.
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love this comment. I really enjoy node.js but have never really paid attention to Joyent, until now. They have immense respect from me (not that it counts for much) for their candid response and their push for SSJS and node.js
Why does that quote give you more respect for Joyent?
Not necessarily just that comment, the post in general gives me a new found respect for them. They are opinionated, and have a clear focus for what they want to do, and would rather do it in a way they feel is the right way than cave into pressure from big players to do it the 'safe' way. I don't think Bruno, by extension Yahoo, wants node.js to compromise what makes it great, but it definitely isn't tested and it takes balls for Joyent to invest so heavily on evented I/O for V8.
Re: Joyent responds to Yahoo's issues with V8 being used under Node.js
#20Until node.js makes their home page intelligible to a novice, none of this matters.
Perhaps I came across too negatively. But, man, it takes some digging to find out how cool node.js is.