Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Tino Wildenhain]

David Bear schrieb:
> 
> 
> On 12/10/05, *Tino Wildenhain* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
> 
> Am Mittwoch, den 07.12.2005, 09:39 + schrieb Chris Withers:
> > Dieter Maurer wrote:
> > > The original poster explained his wish to retain FCGI:
> > >
> > >   It reuses an existing connection between Apache and Zope
> > >   while (he thinks and I might believe it) the recommended
> > >   "mod_proxy" way each time opens a new connection.
> > >
> > >   Thus, FastCGI might be more efficient.
> >
> > Show me some evidence proving that fcgi or mod_proxy is the
> significant
> > limiting performance factor in a setup involving zope and I'll
> take this
> > seriously ;-)
> 
> The funny thing is - performance isnt really the pro of
> fcgi over http. Its really more about transporting header
> and environment data from zope to apache, which is
> kinda limited with mod_proxy. (Think alternative
> authentication, ssl )
> 
> 
> 
> This was my  reason for going with  fastcgi instead of modproxy. I
> wanted zope to also log the http header data from the client. I want to
> have zope make some decisions based on the user agent. If modproxy can
> preserve ALL the request headers that I suppose I can use it. I somewhat
> understand fastcgi. I don't understand everything mod-proxy does...
> (well, its more magical than fastcgi)

mod_proxy passes all relevent headers. Even user-agent.
But serious web development should never try to depend
on the useragent string. (it can and will be faked - and
you will have a hard time to know all possible user-agents
out there (I occassionally browse as google - you would
be surpriced what you see :))

The only hard part is ssl-client certificate or other
apache side auth information. Auth-headers (basic auth)
are of course passed.

___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[David Bear]

On 12/10/05, Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 07.12.2005, 09:39 + schrieb Chris Withers:> Dieter Maurer wrote:> > The original poster explained his wish to retain FCGI:> >> >   It reuses an existing connection between Apache and Zope
> >   while (he thinks and I might believe it) the recommended> >   "mod_proxy" way each time opens a new connection.> >> >   Thus, FastCGI might be more efficient.>
> Show me some evidence proving that fcgi or mod_proxy is the significant> limiting performance factor in a setup involving zope and I'll take this> seriously ;-)The funny thing is - performance isnt really the pro of
fcgi over http. Its really more about transporting headerand environment data from zope to apache, which iskinda limited with mod_proxy. (Think alternativeauthentication, ssl )

This was my  reason for going with  fastcgi instead of
modproxy. I wanted zope to also log the http header data from the
client. I want to have zope make some decisions based on the user
agent. If modproxy can preserve ALL the request headers that I suppose
I can use it. I somewhat understand fastcgi. I don't understand
everything mod-proxy does... (well, its more magical than fastcgi)
Tino.___Zope maillist  -  
Zope@zope.orghttp://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
 )-- David BearWhat's the difference between private knowledge and public knowledge?
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Chris Withers]

Tino Wildenhain wrote:

The funny thing is - performance isnt really the pro of
fcgi over http. Its really more about transporting header
and environment data from zope to apache, which is
kinda limited with mod_proxy. (Think alternative
authentication, ssl )


Indeed, and it's funny that the guy complaining was complaining about 
performance rather than this, which seems like quite a reasonable 
justification for keeping FCGI support.


Of course, it still doesn't change the fact that no-one knows how /wants 
to maintain it ;-)


Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce

http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Tino Wildenhain]

...
> The funny thing is - performance isnt really the pro of
> fcgi over http. Its really more about transporting header
> and environment data from zope to apache, which is
^^
actually I meant apache to zope.

I go and get some coffee...

Tino

___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Tino Wildenhain]

Am Mittwoch, den 07.12.2005, 09:39 + schrieb Chris Withers:
> Dieter Maurer wrote:
> > The original poster explained his wish to retain FCGI:
> > 
> >   It reuses an existing connection between Apache and Zope
> >   while (he thinks and I might believe it) the recommended
> >   "mod_proxy" way each time opens a new connection.
> > 
> >   Thus, FastCGI might be more efficient.
> 
> Show me some evidence proving that fcgi or mod_proxy is the significant 
> limiting performance factor in a setup involving zope and I'll take this 
> seriously ;-)

The funny thing is - performance isnt really the pro of
fcgi over http. Its really more about transporting header
and environment data from zope to apache, which is
kinda limited with mod_proxy. (Think alternative
authentication, ssl )

Tino.

___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Chris Withers]

Dieter Maurer wrote:

The original poster explained his wish to retain FCGI:

  It reuses an existing connection between Apache and Zope
  while (he thinks and I might believe it) the recommended
  "mod_proxy" way each time opens a new connection.

  Thus, FastCGI might be more efficient.


Show me some evidence proving that fcgi or mod_proxy is the significant 
limiting performance factor in a setup involving zope and I'll take this 
seriously ;-)


Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce

http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Dieter Maurer]

Chris Withers wrote at 2005-12-5 07:51 +:
>Andrew Milton wrote:
>> 
>> If there's noone around who can maintain it, then just say that. Don't say
>> there's 'a better way', because I can guarantee you the people using FCGI are
>> using it for a reason, 
>
>I haven't seen anyone come up with real justification for using FCGI...

The original poster explained his wish to retain FCGI:

  It reuses an existing connection between Apache and Zope
  while (he thinks and I might believe it) the recommended
  "mod_proxy" way each time opens a new connection.

  Thus, FastCGI might be more efficient.


-- 
Dieter
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Andreas Jung]

--On 5. Dezember 2005 07:51:17 + Chris Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:



Andrew Milton wrote:


If there's noone around who can maintain it, then just say that. Don't
say there's 'a better way', because I can guarantee you the people using
FCGI are using it for a reason,


I haven't seen anyone come up with real justification for using FCGI...



FCGI is deprecated effective Zope 2.9.

-aj




pgpMOEEV52pNP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Chris Withers]

Andrew Milton wrote:


If there's noone around who can maintain it, then just say that. Don't say
there's 'a better way', because I can guarantee you the people using FCGI are
using it for a reason, 


I haven't seen anyone come up with real justification for using FCGI...


I can imagine a pretty big set of people running Zope via FCGI who are
not running Apache.. I can also imagine that magical code fairies fight with
magical code trolls to the death to decide what pieces of code stay and which 
pieces go.


Uh? I'm not sure whether to ask for some of what you're on or just run 
away screaming ;-)


Chris

--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
   - http://www.simplistix.co.uk

___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce

http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Re: [Zope] Re: why will FastCGI not be supported in the Future.

[Andrew Milton]

+---[ Tres Seaver ]--
| -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
| Hash: SHA1
| 
| Andrew Milton wrote:
| > +---[ Andreas Jung ]--
| > | 
| > | Effective from Zope 2.9 I marked FCGI as deprecated - both in the 
| > | documentation and through a deprecation warning in the sources. Please 
note 
| > | that it does not mean that the FCGI might go away automatically in the 
| > | future. This is basically a reminder for people using FCGI that there is 
a 
| > | better way (in our opinion) to run Zope under  Apache than using FCGI.
| > 
| > This of course assumes the entire world runs Apache.
| 
| How big do you imagine the set is of people running Zope via FastCGI who
| are *not* running Apache as the front end?  Now how big is the
| intersection of that set with the set of folks who have (and will use)
| commit access to Zope?
|
| The real issue from Andreas' point of view is that *nobody* who helps
| maintain Zope also knows and uses FastCGI;  *he* used to be the person
| who did know it (per http://www.fastcgi.com/), but no longer.
|
| Without such a person or persons, Zope cannot really claim to support
| FastCGI at all.

My issue isn't with the loss of FCGI (although I know a few hosting companies
that might be upset at that, perhaps you can scare them into funding its
maintainence d8). It's with the way that there is 'a real issue' and a
'made up justification'. 

If there's noone around who can maintain it, then just say that. Don't say
there's 'a better way', because I can guarantee you the people using FCGI are
using it for a reason, and there isn't a "better way" for them. 

P.S. 

I can imagine a pretty big set of people running Zope via FCGI who are
not running Apache.. I can also imagine that magical code fairies fight with
magical code trolls to the death to decide what pieces of code stay and which 
pieces go.

-- 
Andrew Milton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )