On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 14:52 +0100, [email protected] wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, Marcos Douglas wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:23 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, Marcos Douglas wrote: > >> > >>> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Michael Van Canneyt > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, 24 Nov 2010, Marcos Douglas wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Michael Van Canneyt > >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Currently we're deploying a webapp that uses fpweb, FastCGI and runs as > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> windows service app. Although the latter is more of a necessity than a > >>>>>> voluntary choice. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The fastcgi approach makes it easy to debug. > >>>>> > >>>>> FastCGI or CGI gateway? > >>>> > >>>> FastCGI. > >>>> > >>>> But using the gateway shouldn't make any difference: you debug the > >>>> fastcgi, > >>>> not the gateway :-) > >>> > >>> But if you want to update the application you will have to leave the > >>> application unavailable. > >>> With CGI gateway you can redirect the flow to another server. > >> > >> In my opinion that is pointless and serves no useful purpose except maybe > >> in > >> a few trivial cases. > >> > >> The reason you use FastCGI is that you can keep things in > >> memory during the session of the user. (DB connection, transactions and > >> possibly complete form states) > >> > >> By switching to another FastCGI instance, you loose all this session > >> information: you get the same effect as stopping and restarting fastCGI, > >> except maybe a couple of failed requests. It's not worth the overhead IMHO. > > > > You rigth about the overhead... > > And why you said: "(for the record, I use module mod_fastcgi, not the > > mod_fcgid module)" > > There are many differences between them? > > The can do the same thing: > By default, a fastcgi process is started by the webserver, passing it the > socket on which it should listen.
Most imporant difference is that mod_fastcgi is deprecated and doesn't follow the FastCGI standard. > But mod_fastcgi additionally allows you to specify that the fastcgi process is > already running, and that no process should be started. The process can run > on the same or on another machine as the Webserver: What you described here is the FastCGI standard. This way the webserver can scale up the amount of connections for each instance of the cgi-process. > FastCgiExternalServer D:/counte/verbruik/server -host 127.0.0.1:2015 > -idle-timeout 30 -flush You can configure mod_fcgid also this way, if you want. (Except for debugging, I woudn't know why you would do that. And I use the embedded webserver for debugging) > This is very convenient, because you can start the fastcgi process in the > debugger, just as any normal process. Or, the fastCGI process can be a > windows service. Hmm.. windows service could be an idea. But that scales not that easy, offcourse. > Other than that, the configuration option names are different. > > My FastCGI process is running as a windows service. What is exactly the reason for this? Isn't it much easier when the webserver starts (and stops, when it is not used) the cgi-application, than doing this in a Windows service? Joost. -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
