On Feb 15, 3:07 am, Graham Dumpleton <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why wont mod_proxy do the trick? What part of the response headers > isn't it leaving alone? > > If you can't get mod_proxy to work, then only other thing I can think > of is you use a CGI script which acts as a proxy. Such as: > > http://www.jmarshall.com/tools/cgiproxy/ > > This requires Apache to be setup for Non-Parsed Header (NPH) mode and > any back end server headers should get passed through as is presuming > the cgiproxy itself doesn't fiddle with them. > > Otherwise you will need to write your own simply cgiproxy equivalent.
mod_proxy won't do because the interface to the app server listens on a domain socket and the communication protocol is non-standard. I can use a cgi script but then the start up costs are high which is what I am trying to avoid. As I wrote, what I would like to have is a bridge, preferably written in python which passes the request info then forwards stream output directly to apache. In the future, I my intention is to support fd passing between the bridge and the app server to avoid unnecessary i/ o. So, I take it that what I am asking for is impossible with mod_wsgi. Thanks, John -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "modwsgi" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/modwsgi?hl=en.
