On Son 04.10.2009 16:11, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 03:59:07PM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote:
If you're interested, I've just pushed the final cleanup of the stats
socket handler. It is much cleaner now and should be readable enough to
be used as a starting point for other protocols. You can also take a
look at the http stats (read stats_uri_auth()), and you will see it's
not much hard.
Thanks but I yust want to take a look into the protocols and then into
the app.
I want to undersatand fcgi as good as http before I start to play with
your code ;-)
I will try to make a fcgi app out of haproxy to get more familiar with
the protocol. After that I will try to add a 'applet' so that I don't
mixe 2 new issuess, learn fcgi & learn haproxy applet ;-).
Be careful, the term "applet" here was chosen to designate a piece of
code running inside one function and doing its own I/O itself, but it's
far from being enough to run an application (it would be too hard to
write and too risky). Things like advanced health-checks should be easy
though.
Ok.
So the 'insert' and 'indirect' cookie mode ist used mostly, right?
In this case the browser gives you with the cookie the right backend.
yes, that's it.
I will take a look into the fcgi & lsapi[1] and come back ;-)
[1] http://www.litespeedtech.com/php-litespeed-sapi.html
http://www.litespeedtech.com/products/lsapi/overview/
did not know about those. I'm not surprized they claim higher
performance than fcgi, as there is a lot of rewriting in fcgi,
and everything which can be avoided should be.
I have started.
The reason is that php 5.3.1 have this a further sapi and its looks
nice.
BR
Aleks
