I had thought (obviously incorrectly) that mod_proxy was hard to configure correctly to pass all headers, particularly in complex virtual hosting scenarios. But I'm no Apache expert.

And I thought that mod_redirect added overhead to every request, doing the redirect cycle via the browser. It also exposed the port 8000-based Zope to direct access, which some admin's might not want.

But mostly I thought PCGI (and FastCGI) was the preferred way, since it is covered in detail in Zope's doc/WEBSERVER.TXT and neither mod_proxy nor mod_redirect are mentioned in there. ;-)

I just figured PCGI was cleaner and let me delegate responsibility to each hosting client, to manage their own CGI-BIN stuff w/o access to Apache's config files..

So if we drop PCGI, we'll need an action item to rework that file and perhaps ZopeBook et. al.


Tim Hoffman wrote:

I have always run Zope behind Apache utilising mod_proxy.

I have to admit I never tried or really even evaluated pcgi, and don't build it when I install Zope.

Is there a benefit of pcgi over using mod_proxy ?

Guido van Rossum wrote:
> AFAIK most people use Apache's mod_redirect to a Zope HTTP server
> running at (e.g.) port 8000.  No additional software needed.

On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 09:16, Jeff Rush wrote:

Having only ever used Zope-behind-PCGI myself, if we drop it, what would be the prevailing approach for running Zope behind Apache? Has everyone switched to FastCGI (or Quixote's SCGI) but me?

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

Reply via email to