On 29 Nov 00 at 21:53, Jeff Breidenbach wrote:
Let me count the ways I like static HTML files.
I'd add to that simplicity, simplicity and simplicity :)
* their benefit from internet caching infrastructure
* computational cheapness of serving them (disk is cheaper than CPU)
...but here I'd differ. If you are running your own server, then
yes, diskspace is cheap. But on a commercial host, diskspace and
bandwidth are the chargeble factors: CPU usage is generally
unmetered. I have to restrict the lomgevity of my archives to
conserve diskspace, but a database-driven archive system would
probably allow me to keep much more data on-line without extra cost.
It should also facilitate easier searching than with a static system.
So despite my general preference for static files, this is one
application where a database might suit me rather well! (Though I'm
aware it's partly a consequence of an ill-considered charging system,
which might change ... but it is quite prevalent)
A d/b-driven system would also make it much easier to roll out layout
changes, which can be a real pain on a static system.
Claire McNab -- Claire(_at_)siberia(_dot_)demon(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk