On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Adam Prime <adam.pr...@utoronto.ca> wrote: > In the context of people with uber-cheap virtual webhosting, is changing > MaxRequestsPerChild really an option?
No, but frankly, uber-cheap virtual hosting will never support mod_perl or mod_perlite. > FastCGI, to me anyway, has a big barrier to entry because you have to modify > your code to run in it. I don't see that as significant, and I'm sure someone could write a Registry-style wrapper if they wanted to. > In the perl world, nothing is quite that simple. Movable Type has come > pretty close, but that's only if you're running under plain CGI (ie the > devil) Well, why doesn't Movable Type make FastCGI installation easier? A naive question, but that sounds like the path of least resistance. PHP stuff has to deal with a variety of deployment options too (mod_php, FastCGI, php as CGI, code cache or not, etc). > Don't get me wrong, there is almost no way that i'd ever actually use > mod_perlite, but I can appreciate that there are a lot of people out there, > that might become interested in perl instead of php if this niche was > filled. For the long term health of perl 5, we would be greatly served by > bringing in more new blood. I'm happy to have people hack on their projects if they're enjoying it, and I don't want them to stop. I do think that the best path to widely available cheap hosting for fast perl webapps is FastCGI though, at this point. It's already out there, and the features that people give up by using it instead of mod_perl are not important to this group of users. - Perrin
