On 23.06.10 00:10, synx wrote:
I looked over the FastCGI and SCGI protocols, and concluded that they
weren't much more efficient than a protocol known as HTTP. Why not proxy
your data to a webserver, using apache's proxy module?
I recently looked at FastCGI and came to the same conclusion. To be
honest SCGI is somewhat simpler since it handles most of the validation
and parsing for you. FastCGI is not since it adds much of it's own
boilerplate. FastCGI can be used for some other task than simple HTTP
proxying (e.g. delegating authentication) but AFAIK nobody is using it.
My apache2.conf has a lot of these in it:
<Location "/z/">
ProxyPass http://127.0.0.1:6666/ retry=10
</Location>
If you can run a CGI program that launches Racket on some script file,
then you also have the ability to run Racket as a little web server. If
you can run Racket as a FastCGI server, or a SCGI server, then you also
have the ability to run Racket as a little web server!
That is the approach I settled on too (with nginx as the proxy). Just
remember to bind the racket app to "localhost"/127.0.0.1 and no to a
public interface.
--
regards,
Jakub Piotr Cłapa
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
