Elliot F. wrote: > > How does speedycgi compare to pperl? Is pperl being used more as a > generic term for persistent perl processes? Speedycgi has worked > wonderfully for me (Debian Sarge 2.22-1) without any apparent > problems. However, most of the discussions I've seen tend to mention > pperl rather than speedycgi.
I've been using speedycgi/qpsmtpd on several heavily loaded Redhat systems. Has been working well. As has been mentioned, there are some unresolved problems using pperl with qpsmtpd. After making changes to plugins, a simple 'touch' of the main qpsmtpd executable will cause speedyCGI to reload qpsmtpd with any changes. Jim James H. Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
