Sebastian Harl wrote: >> Secondly, why is FastCGI being used? My life would be easier if >> collection4 was an "app server", i.e. it was a permanently-running >> daemon that spoke HTTP to the "real" web server, being a reverse >> proxy like varnish, nginx or apache mod_proxy. > > I suppose, FastCGI has been used as that was (or seemed to be ;-)) > easier than implementing a stand-alone "app server" talking HTTP.
A slight acquaintance suggested this can be achieved with libevent: 17:05 <SpamapS> twb: In that case, libevent FTW 17:06 <SpamapS> full http server code built in.. :) 17:06 <twb> I've only ever seen libevent used in rxvt 17:07 <SpamapS> twb: recent versions of libevent have evhttp.h ... 17:07 <SpamapS> http://monkey.org/~provos/libevent/doxygen-1.4.3/ 17:07 <SpamapS> twb: you just register a callback per URI, and a default callback for dynamic URI's 17:09 <SpamapS> I played around with it a few months ago.. VERY easy to write an HTTP server My C-fu is pretty darn weak, so if someone else wants to take point on this, they're more than welcome. Otherwise I'll try to look into it this week, but most likely I will completely forget about it. _______________________________________________ collectd mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.verplant.org/listinfo/collectd
