On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Chen, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> May I ask about the httpd conf file for your apache2.2.10?
>
> Here are the LoadModule lines that I believe are relevant:
You probably don't need these; if you don't have a 'Require User
someusername' directive in your httpd
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:46 PM, Andrew Rodland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But you _do_ want to keep static file serving apart from the app code (or else
> incur the memory overhead of an app process for every file download), so you
> do
> need to go that frontend/backend route -- and it seems t
Douglas Hunter wrote:
I've been playing with the experimental event MPM for a front end
caching reverse proxy, and have been very happy with the results so far.
ditto. Witness it in use here:
http://ridecharge.com
PXY: httpd 2.2.9 w/ event mpm
Cache: X
APP: mongrel
mongrel's replacement pass
Foo JH wrote:
> Adam Prime wrote:
>> The results of the mod_perl survey that Fred Moyer and I conducted can
>> be found at the following link:
> Interesting list. Any chance the workshop will come to Singapore? :)
Not quite, but close...
http://us.apachecon.com/c/accn2008/
(when this link breaks
Adam Prime wrote:
> André Warnier wrote:
>> Maybe this is the time to ask.
>> I am using Linux Debian, and getting Apache 2, perl and mod_perl 2
>> from there (apt-get).
>> I have never been quite sure which mpm the packager decided to
>> configure, as the apache2.conf contains parameters for prefo
Perrin Harkins wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Adam Prime <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd really love to see a best practices kind of document, or at least a more
detailed document that described getting the light front / heavy backend
stuff working. The mp1 guide has a pretty extensive
Perrin Harkins elem.com> writes:
>
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:49 PM, David E. Wheeler kineticode.com>
wrote:
> > To a certain degree, Apache/mod_perl is a victim of the success of HTTP.
> > It's fairly easy to implement a new HTTP server, so there are a lot of them,
> > and many are easy to u
May I ask about the httpd conf file for your apache2.2.10?
Here are the LoadModule lines that I believe are relevant:
LoadModule authn_file_module modules/mod_authn_file.so
LoadModule authn_dbm_module modules/mod_authn_dbm.so
LoadModule authn_anon_module modules/mod_authn_anon.so
LoadModule authn
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Adam Prime <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd really love to see a best practices kind of document, or at least a more
> detailed document that described getting the light front / heavy backend
> stuff working. The mp1 guide has a pretty extensive section on the vari
Perrin Harkins wrote:
It's the same with mod_perl: you can restart your backend server
without touching the frontend proxy server. It's possible that some
FastCGI implementations have a truly seamless way to do this though,
holding requests while the backend restarts. I haven't played with it
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:09 PM, Octavian Rasnita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, I've seen that many Catalyst developers prefer to use fastcgi and
> not mod_perl, because when using fastcgi, the applications can be restarted
> without restarting the whole web server.
It's the same with mod_
- Original Message - 2:49 PM, David E. Wheeler
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To a certain degree, Apache/mod_perl is a victim of the success of HTTP.
It's fairly easy to implement a new HTTP server, so there are a lot of
them,
and many are easy to use and extremely fast. If all you're inter
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:49 PM, David E. Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> To a certain degree, Apache/mod_perl is a victim of the success of HTTP. It's
>> fairly easy to implement a new HTTP server, so there are a l
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 1:27 PM, David E. Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 11, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Perrin Harkins wrote:
>
>> I'm fine with people using other open source tools to get where they
>> want to go but the justifications they make about mod_perl being
>> heavier or slower rarel
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:49 PM, David E. Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've said this before, but I think this is not a very rational claim.
> Network servers are actually pretty hard to get right and HTTP is no
On Nov 11, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Perrin Harkins wrote:
I'm fine with people using other open source tools to get where they
want to go but the justifications they make about mod_perl being
heavier or slower rarely have any actual research behind them.
Yeah, I wasn't making the case for mongrel or
Hmm, this is making me want to run benchmarks! Maybe a solid set of
benchmarks would be a fun OSCON presentation next year.
++
I've loved your other comparison talks in the past and this would be a nice one. Make sure to
include the new Mojo (kind of like Mongrel but in Perl).
--
Michael
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:49 PM, David E. Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To a certain degree, Apache/mod_perl is a victim of the success of HTTP.
> It's fairly easy to implement a new HTTP server, so there are a lot of them,
> and many are easy to use and extremely fast. If all you're intere
On Nov 10, 2008, at 3:46 AM, André Warnier wrote:
- the rate of new people coming into the community has been
declining.
The responses there are indeed a bit scary. It feels like we're a
dying breed.
I believe this is to a large extent a "marketing issue" for perl in
general, and mod_per
> Go forth and code! :)
Go, Perl! (surely) :)
20 matches
Mail list logo
