Although, I would go for something like pound doing the proxying for
me, instead of mod_proxy
I can't agree more!
Pound (http://www.apsis.ch/pound/index_html) is light-weight, easy to
configure, fast, stable, and makes the whole SSL and load balancing dead
easy.
Pound++
Clint
On Nov 8, 2007, at 5:50 AM, Clinton Gormley wrote:
Pound (http://www.apsis.ch/pound/index_html) is light-weight, easy to
configure, fast, stable, and makes the whole SSL and load balancing
dead
easy.
I can disagree -- nginx does everything that pound does, plus will
handle your vanilla
From: John ORourke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Seriously though, it looks as though there are 5-10 good front end server
options which support the following to various degrees:
- reverse proxy
- caching
- load balancing
- static file serving
There is no clear choice since our setups range from single
On Nov 8, 2007, at 1:40 PM, John ORourke wrote:
Pound (http://www.apsis.ch/pound/index_html) is light-weight,
easy to
I can disagree -- nginx does everything that pound does, plus
will handle your vanilla
FLAME WAR!!!1!1!
well its not meant to flame... your options are this:
Hi folks,
I'm about to write a generic set of init scripts and config files to
make setting up dual apache servers (one light proxy/cache/ssl, one
heavy mod_perl) easy.
Am I reinventing the wheel?
If not I'll post a link here when I'm done.
cheers
John
John == John ORourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John Hi folks,
John I'm about to write a generic set of init scripts and config files to make
John setting up dual apache servers (one light proxy/cache/ssl, one heavy
mod_perl)
John easy.
John Am I reinventing the wheel?
John If not I'll post a
Randal is the master wizard, so you might wanna read that article in detail.
Although, I would go for something like pound doing the proxying for
me, instead of mod_proxy
I like to run apache on an unprivileged port, so that's an added
bonus, plus pound will take care of ssl too.
On 11/8/07,
