Maybe you need to configure FastCGI for more processes - 500 could be
result of getting more requests than there are processes to handle them.
How would I do that?
The easiest way would be to open WINDOWS/system32/inetsrv/fcgiext.ini
and edit the MaxInstances parameter for PHP binary there/ T
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> OK, I installed FCGI and ran my testsuite. I did get more requests in a
>> timeperiod of 5 minutes, but unfortunatly I also got a lot of errors
>> (HTTP 500). But the performance of successful pages was increased by
>> almost 15%.
>
> Maybe you need to configure FastC
If you interested in further improving performance, look at bytecode
caches such as Zend Platform or APC. It can be especially beneficial if
you use frameworks containing a lot of PHP classes.
As I already mentioned, I used eAccelerator. Does APC perform better?
No idea about eAccelerator, did
OK, I installed FCGI and ran my testsuite. I did get more requests in a
timeperiod of 5 minutes, but unfortunatly I also got a lot of errors
(HTTP 500). But the performance of successful pages was increased by
almost 15%.
Maybe you need to configure FastCGI for more processes - 500 could be
res
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> OK, so I will give that a try. As far as I understand, I basically just
>> have to replace the association of ".php" to "php5isapi.dll" with
>> "php-cgi.exe"; and then set the global path to include my php-folder,
>> right?
>
> No, that probably would make it CGI, whi
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> If you interested in further improving performance, look at bytecode
> caches such as Zend Platform or APC. It can be especially beneficial if
> you use frameworks containing a lot of PHP classes.
As I already mentioned, I used eAccelerator. Does APC perform better?
OK, so I will give that a try. As far as I understand, I basically just
have to replace the association of ".php" to "php5isapi.dll" with
"php-cgi.exe"; and then set the global path to include my php-folder, right?
No, that probably would make it CGI, which is slow. For FastCGI, you
need FastCG
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> OK; so for serving multiple concurrent clients ISAPI would sound to me
>> like the better choice, since it can use threads, or what would be the
>> advantage of using fastcgi?
>
> Non-threaded PHP is faster than threaded PHP, because it doesn't need to
> do locks betw
OK; so for serving multiple concurrent clients ISAPI would sound to me
like the better choice, since it can use threads, or what would be the
advantage of using fastcgi?
Non-threaded PHP is faster than threaded PHP, because it doesn't need to
do locks between threads and keep the thread context
Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
>> But as far as I understand, java kinda does the same thing, doesn't it?
>> Java programs are being compiled into some intermediate language, and
>> this is being interpreted at runtime. So using an accelerator should
>> mimic the same setup for php.
>
> Java is much l
But as far as I understand, java kinda does the same thing, doesn't it?
Java programs are being compiled into some intermediate language, and
this is being interpreted at runtime. So using an accelerator should
mimic the same setup for php.
Java is much less dynamic language than PHP (try doing
OK, so FastCGI is much better than ISAPI? Looking quickly at the
Not exactly so - the thing here is that non-threadsafe PHP is faster
than threadsafe PHP - since no inter-thread locking is necessary. And
since ISAPI PHP must be TS and FastCGI PHP can be non-TS - the FastCGI
PHP ends up being
12 matches
Mail list logo
