<div>So if djabberd and perlbal are comparable in the way they perform, it could be better off using djabberd since its easy to integrate ur pieces of software i.e client to server(C2S) and Server 2Server(S2S) due its xml protocol and its pluggable nature.
</div>
<div>For having perlbal do long polling, may require some changes in perlbal code so that you could integrate your custom plugin which again is in perl(like the IMVU folks)? This could be a little difficult for people who dont know
perl.In this aspect jabber has a generic xml protocol to be followed which could be lot easier?</div>
<div>Let me know if Im wrong anywhere.I'm just trying to analyze what could be best in what kind of scenario.A head to head comparison.</div>
<div>Perlbal ofcourse could have many other things like internal url routing, load balancing etc etc..which could be lagging in a jabber implementation.</div>
<div>Whats ideal where and why, thats the real question..</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks</div>
<div>Prateek.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/8/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">David Davis</b> <<a href="mailto:david.davis@gmail.com">david.davis@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">He's referring to djabberd.<br><br><br>David<br><br>On 8/8/06, Artur Bergman <<a href="mailto:abergman@sixapart.com">
abergman@sixapart.com</a>> wrote:<br>><br>> The thing that might help us if you say which Jabber Server implementation.<br>><br>> Cheers<br>> Artur<br>><br>><br>> On Aug 8, 2006, at 5:01 AM, Prateek Mathur wrote:
<br>><br>> ok I meant a Jabber Server implementation with Perlbal(with long polling) :)<br>><br>> Prateek.<br>><br>><br>><br>> On 8/8/06, Ask Bjørn Hansen <<a href="mailto:ask@develooper.com">ask@develooper.com
</a>> wrote:<br>> ><br>> > On Aug 8, 2006, at 3:08 AM, Prateek Mathur wrote:<br>> ><br>> > > What comparison could be there with perlbal long polling(delayed<br>> > > connection response) vs Jabber, in terms of 1) scalability 2)load
<br>> > > balancing capability 3)usage?<br>> ><br>> > You are comparing a piece of software (perlbal, implementing http)<br>> > with a protocol (jabber).<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > - ask
<br>> ><br>> ><br>><br>><br>><br></blockquote></div><br>