Matt & List,
> Is there any benefit of mod_proxy over a real proxy front end like "Oops"?
>
This is a good question..., the only answer I've come up with thus far
from reading the new-httpd devel list is compelling though. Here's
what people there said in response to folks trying to kill mod_proxy
as a canoniacle apache module: (Using the argument your sort of
alluding to)
1) Using mod_proxy as opposed to a seperate package allows you to
leverage other apache modules..., mod_ssl, and mod_raven for
commercial folks comes to mind.
2) Apache logging. It's the real deal.
Those are the only two that I saw on the list that held any water with
me. However, if there is an async i/o frontend out there, it would
have distinct advantages over apache. Namely speed. But for me the
most compelling is reason #1. If I finish my async i/o patch to
mod_proxy..., to me, there would be no reason to contemplate another
package. (Clearly HUGE personal bias here)
Thanks,
Shane.
BTW: As Mike Hall brought up, they wanted to kill it because there is
no maintainer for mod_proxy. There are a lot of people
working on it right now (Graham and Sam..., Grahams cleaning up the
code and Sams porting it to Apache2. I think this module is going to
get a lot better in the very near term. Oh yea, and Graham is working
on KeepAlives, and submitted a HTTP1.1 patch to it. I'm adding
features but I haven't posted them to the new-httpd list... waiting
till I have a critical mass of feature addition before posting them.)
