steve roussey wrote:
> On 8/9/05, Andreas Korthaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>By using lighttpd with fastcgi we seperate the webserver process from
>>php processes (which could even work on other machines)...
> Someone else emailed me about using FastCGI with Apache 2.1/event but
> I just figured that there would be a significant slowdown using
> FastCGI rather than a module/handler. (Currently I compile PHP into
> Apache statically and turn off Apache's dynamic module loading ability
> -- something I couldn't figure out in Apache2). What is your
> experience with FastCGI?

PHP by default compiles as a non-pic shared library now which is just as
fast as a static build inside Apache since it is the pic stuff that
slows down a DSO.  So there is really no need for static builds anymore,
unless you happen to be on a fringe OS that doesn't support non-pic
shared libs.

> Still, I looked at lighttpd and it looks promising. The one thing that
> started all of this was Apache 2.1's event MPM that used a single
> thread to handle all open Keep-Alives looked very efficient.

I think you are probably better off solving this in a lightweight
frontend process.  Chances are you are going to need lingerd if you go
keepalive, so perhaps the real solution is to make lingerd handle not
just the shutdown, but also the startup of the request.


PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit:

Reply via email to