On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 16:30, Geoffrey Talvola wrote: > Ian recently checked in code to WebKit that allows the appserver to serve > HTTP directly. You can try it out by checking out Webware from CVS and > running this in the WebKit directory: > > python Launch.py NewThreadedAppServer http > > I just tried it for the first time. It works -- you can connect to > http://localhost:8080/ and view pages without a webserver. Unfortunately, > it seems to consume 100% of the CPU even when it's not doing anything. > There must be a busy loop in there somewhere. Ian, have you ever noticed > this? I'm on Windows NT 4.0 if that matters.
I just tried it on Linux, and didn't have a problem. Does it change if you start the http server? (It shouldn't -- the loop for adapter and http interfaces should be identical) > > After looking at pound, I decided to try it with Webware. > > It has been a while. ThreadedHttpServer.py seems to have disappeared > > to be replaced by Adapters/HTTPAdapter.py which is marked with > > > > "PS: This adapter is experimental and should not be used in > > a production environment" > > > > Since it still makes a network connection to talk to a separate > > appserver process, it seems that it has little to recommend it. I envision both the AppServer HTTP server and the adapter being used less frequently -- perhaps in an application installed on a client machine, where you don't want to deal with Apache installation. These are already installed for you. The other case I might imagine is for evaluating Webware, again because it eases installation. The adapter is somewhat better than the multi-port AppServer, because it won't refuse connections while the AppServer is restarting. It was something of an experiment, but I figured there wasn't any reason to throw it away. The multi-port AppServer would actually be much more interesting when serving protocols other than HTTP -- things like FTP, SMTP, Jabber, etc. In these cases the existing servers don't have good hooks for dynamic backends, so we might want to serve that protocol directly. But I knew HTTP, so that was a easier way to test the multi-port code. This support would also help for serving SCGI. In fact, what would be really cool is if Pound could be made to connect via SCGI. I believe it already does some HTTP/1.1 -> HTTP/1.0 translation, and going that last step to SCGI probably wouldn't be too hard. I was thinking it would be need to have mod_webkit/SCGI support in some small web server (thttp or something), but really it seems like Pound would be even better. The only negative is that it's nice to be able to serve some static content directly without the AppServer/double-connection overhead. -- Ian Bicking Colorstudy Web Development [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.colorstudy.com PGP: gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x9B9E28B7 4869 N Talman Ave, Chicago, IL 60625 / (773) 275-7241 ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
