Dossy Shiobara <dossy <at> PANOPTIC.COM> writes:
> To clarify, you want AOLserver to act as a FastCGI client? Can you > explain the benefit of this approach, rather than having the front-end > webserver simply proxy HTTP requests to AOLserver? This is where the > Apache team is going with Tomcat with their mod_ajp connector for > mod_proxy. Granted, the inter-server protocol will be AJP and not HTTP, > but is that a material difference? >
Thanks for such a comprehensive response :-)
I believe for most of the world's departmental web servers which run IIS, mod_proxy is not really a good option. Although it runs well on Windows and could sit in front of IIS/AOLServer, it breaks important things like integrated security, and you end up with a few more moving parts than you really want to have.
> So, I suggest the name "nsfastcgisock" (akin to "nssock" which probably > should be named "nstcpsock" for clarity). If the FastCGI Dev. Kit is > thread-safe, we can just use FCGI_Accept() and take the data it hands > back and craft a Ns_Conn request and do normal request processing and > then send back the response however FastCGI wants it. /OR/, if we don't > get adequate performance this way, we implement another DriverThread > that speaks the FastCGI protocol and does its own socket handling. >
I didn't realize that a standard module might be able to handle this. So this doesn't necessarily require a core hack unless it has special thread or performance requirements?
And even if it does, the multi-protocol patches that may make it into 4.1.0 would address this type of extensibility?
I'm not sure about the fastcgi library's thread safety... that will be easy to find out.
John Sequeira http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/1780
-- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/
To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
