Carl Tyler's Blog

1 - It's time to implement a bit of websphere engine into domino http stack. That would give domino http engine more flexibility and robustness. But i doubt if IBM would let that revenue cut in Websphere happen.

2 - Technically there is no Websphere http stack. It is Apache (just match the Apache HTTP committers against IBM's whois (or whowas)). You can run other http stacks in front of Websphere (Domino for instant). And yes - I second the motion to upgrade/converge the http stack for all of them to the latest Apache code. After all it *is* the defacto market leader.
stw

3 - Hi,

I don't really think thee is an issue with Domino HTTP. It works pretty well for Domino databases and some http files and that is what it is supposed to do!

I think Websphere HTTP (actually, IBM HTTP server that comes with it) also works well for what it is supposed to do, that is, making websphere work...

I don't see a reason to replace any of them, or even, consider using another stack for them, except under "exceptional" circumstances.

Then, I don't think there is even a reason for that question and, about the "things get complicated and that's when you need consultants"... hey... the decision is already made. When you have a Domino server, use the Domino HTTP Stack and when you have a Websphere, use its one. Simple. Again, what is the question?

4 - It's ironic you are asked this question. so often, I read "people" complaining about the complexity of using WebSphere. Now I read a suggestion that it's the right thing. But I'll put that aside for a moment.

The Domino HTTP stack is great for SMB and small-ish loads. If you are using Domino as a full blown Web engine, then you want something like IBM HTTP server - at adds a lot of scalability and stability.

The real question, and one that could be answered (by someone) is how to bundle and pre-integrate it so it is a seamless as the current HTTP stack. I don't think you want all of WebSphere bundled into Domino but the HTTP stack could be a much easier step.

5 - I think there already is a WAS plugin for Domino. It shipped with Domino but became optional with R8 afaik. XPages also brings in a servlet container implementation probably based on Apache Geronimo but it currently seems to be locked. I still remember the words from Arthur Fontaine for Domino 6: "So Apache is in Garnet is out". Since then I have asked a few times but finally gave up. I don't think there is much of a problem to sell two HTTP engines. The problem is more that the Domino HTTP engine is sold as the small one for low traffic websites while Webphere for everything else. For me the advantage of IIS is that it is better than the Domino HTTP stack and has has a proven track record to scale very high (and had some security issues too of course).
Apache for what it's worth is not famous for being a high performance web server but more known for its modules and flexibility.

6 - I don't mind as long as it just installs with Domino and doesn't need more hardware or is finnicky about patches

One of the absolute strengths opf Notes / Domino in SMB is that it is so easy to install.

7 - The original Domino HTTP stack was based on ICS, a version of the old CERN HTTP code that IBM had "productized" and added threading support.

The current Domino HTTP stack was written for R6. It has a very similar architecture to Apache. We couldn't go directly to Apache because running Domino inproc requires threading. Apache did not support a threading model on all platforms back then.

As far as I know, since that time they've shipped the same connector for other web server such as Apache, IIS, etc. as WebSphere does. The only real difference is that WAS ships with (and is configured with) IBM Apache by default.

I'm not sure how XPages was integrated but it's probably done as a Domino HTTP stack plugin module. Ironically this would be exactly the same way that Garnet was integrated.

8 - Lots of chatter about this behind the scenes too for some time. The problem with the IBM HTTP engine is it requires DB2 or some other relational db. The domino one does not. So the question is can they put the ibm http server into domino without requiring db2? If so, it would simplify a lot of issues :)

9 - @8 - huh? IHS does not require DB2 or any database. It's just apache.

@OP - you can run other HTTP stacks in front of WebSphere (apache, IHS, Domino, IIS5/6/7, Sun)

10 - The problem with the IBM HTTP engine is it requires DB2 or some other relational db

What?? That's bobbins!

An alternative http stack for Domino would be nice, but as others have said, clean integration would be key.

11 -

12 - Ben, John is just confused about the HTTP stack and a web container.

13 - Let's not mix up apples and oranges here. The Domino HTTP stack is doing two things: Serving up HTML and other static content, as well as converting proprietary Notes (and now DB2) databases to HTML/static content that the web browser can understand.

Out of the box, IIS and Apache only do the first; even if you configure one of those as the web front end to Domino, you still have to run Domino's HTTP stack to do the second thing.

Also, configuring Domino HTTP, for the most part, is done by configuring the Internet Site document in Notes, a fairly comfortable GUI. You can do the same with IIS, but a lot of shops don't trust IIS with this kind of info or don't run Windows as a web server at all, which leaves you with Apache. Anyone done any serious configuration with httpd.conf files and their ilk? Yes, it's great when it all works, but it will make your head hurt if it's not something you do all the time.

As I said at Lotusphere's meet the developers, I'd love to see a simple tool for configuring Apache as the web front end for Domino without having to maintain the httpd.conf and plugin-cfg.xml files by hand so I can move my Domino app servers and all of their data to my internal network, and hand off all the web serving to Apache, which it does very, very well.

14 - 4,

There are some pretty large web sites running Domino. It would be nice to see how Domino runs compared to Websphere if they were both running on the same hardware that is required to run Websphere and DB2. I believe Domino would run pretty well if you have a 8-way dual core system with 128 Bytes of memory.