Hi Bob, > I'm curious as to why anyone would want to use FastCGI in the first > place if proxying is available? Implementation wise, there's very > little reason why FastCGI would be markedly faster or slower than the > HTTP protocol.
Agreed, there's no point unless FastCGI is significantly faster which would be unexpected. Since the tests show it isn't faster I'm going to carry on using my existing HTTP setup. We can put the FastCGI rumour to bed. Cheers, James --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
