On Thu, Apr 27, 2000 at 02:29:15AM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 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)
I'm with you. Setup Squid at one time and although it worked it did have
some quirks and I didn't see any performance benefits (actually if I recall
it was slower). I like the Apache way as its fairly straight forward
(unless you get into some of the esoteric mod_rewrite stuff), everythings
setup in one config, plus the benefits you mentioned above.
> 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
Yes, recently people have been 'stepping up to the plate', quite a change
from even a month ago, guess they realized its either do or die
--
Marijuana is nature's way of saying, "Hi!".
Mike Hall,
Unix Admin - Rock Island Communications <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
System Admin - riverside.org <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
