Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • How does FastCGI compare to modperl? In terms of
    - Performance (Memory, CPU usage, etc)
    - Scalability
    - Maintainability, ease of management
    - Compatibility
    - Other (insert your story)
    • The Catalyst Cookbook has a section on this [cpan.org]. On one side, mod_perl is very bloated. On the other, why invent another protocol when HTTP will do.
      • Where's this "bloated" idea coming from? The parts of mod_perl that you don't use shouldn't get in your way. The normal way of deploying it (front-end proxy server + mod_perl app server) is functionally identical to FastCGI.
        • and better may I say. The *only* advantage I see for fastcgi is for deploying multiple applications (written in different languages) through one webserver providing a more complex service.
  • Any particular reason why you don't use lighttpd [lighttpd.net]?
    • Any particular reason you do use lighttpd?
      • Actually, I don't. It is just that the configuration described here seems to be exactly the kind of thing lighttpd is good at. If you are comfortable with Apache, I'm not sure there is any particularly good reason to switch.