Re: Single PerlResponseHander for Web Application
On 18 Jul 2011, at 23:02, Jerry Pereira wrote: > Please let me know of your views. I am not planning to use Catalyst or > existing frameworks as of now. Any reason? There are lightweight ones that play well with modern approaches to plugins and multi-server environments.
Re: Single PerlResponseHander for Web Application
I agree, but isn't the Handler tightly coupled to the URI? rather if i can configure the mapping of URI and sub-handlers in a different configuration file or database, it will be easier to handle URI changes. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Perrin Harkins wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Jerry Pereira > wrote: > > Single PerlResponseHandler for my application, all requests will be > > submitted to this handler, the handler will then dispatch the request to > > appropriate sub-handlers based on the URI path. > > Sounds like Apache2::Dispatch to me. > > > I also thought of using Apache2::Dispatch, > > but i believe it requires that each path has its own handler configured > in > > httpd.conf file (please correct me if I am wrong) > > You're confused about this one. Eliminating the need to add each > class to httpd.conf is the main reason that Dispatch exists. > > - Perrin > -- Your clothes may be the latest in style but you aint completely dressed until you wear a smile! Keep smiling : )
Re: Single PerlResponseHander for Web Application
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Jerry Pereira wrote: > I agree, but isn't the Handler tightly coupled to the URI? Yes. > rather if i can > configure the mapping of URI and sub-handlers in a different configuration > file or database, it will be easier to handle URI changes. I don't see any advantage to doing it in a different config file or database over just putting it in httpd.conf. Are you thinking you would avoid restarts? You'd probably want to restart anyway when you deploy new code. - Perrin
Re: Single PerlResponseHander for Web Application
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Jerry Pereira wrote: > Thats right, i was thinking of avoiding restarts and having single place for > mapping URIs to classes. You can get that to some degree if you use Apache2::Reload and avoid doing anything too strange in your code. The thing is, your best defense against memory bloat is copy-on-write, and that will get crushed if you do a lot of reloading code without a restart. Maybe not an issue for you, depending on how big your site is. - Perrin
