Thanks for everyone's suggestions!  I'll start with the sub-domain
approach.

On May 13, 1:11 pm, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Damian wrote:
> > This is a really interesting module - does anyone know what sort of
> > overheads it has?  I can see this as being quite useful for migrating
> > legacy php code to a pylons app allowing you to reuse some existing
> > php code in an updated pylons app, either for transitioning it or
> > using a mix of the two that integrates cleanly.
>
> We don't use it in production, but instead have a complete Apache
> instance to run a PHP app (WordPress) and use WSGI-based HTTP proxying
> from Python.  But the basic effect is the same, wphp just uses FastCGI
> proxying instead of HTTP.  The overhead hasn't seemed that substantial,
> though passing static files through Python can add some unnecessary
> overhead, including stuff like taking up one of a limited number of
> worker threads.  The actual overhead of running the PHP scripts
> (especially something complex) will usually be much more than the
> proxying overhead.
>
> Incidentally, there's also a similar setup for running CGI scripts,
> which you can use to run, for example, Mailman.  You get all the normal
> CGI overhead in this case, but again that's probably less than the
> overhead of a Python intermediary.
>
> --
> Ian Bicking : [EMAIL PROTECTED] :http://blog.ianbicking.org
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to