Re: [PHP] cgi vs. module

2001-04-17 Thread Christian Reiniger
On Tuesday 17 April 2001 07:10, you wrote: RE: PHP as a CGI or Module This has been discussed some but I am interested to see if one is more popular then the other. My experience has been most people run PHP as a apache module but is there a specific benefit to run it as a cgi program?

Re: [PHP] cgi vs. module

2001-04-17 Thread Plutarck
The only reason I am aware of to use PHP as a CGI is on Windows. Both apache and the php module for windows apache is considered "beta quality", so most people don't want to install beta software on their production machine. But just on my local system I've never had a problem with PHP as CGI. I

Re: [PHP] cgi vs. module

2001-04-17 Thread Jack Dempsey
If someone wants to run PHP scripts for other purposes then dynamic web content, say to act like shell scripts, then you'll want to have it be compiled as a CGI...so, its more than just the windows thing... -jack Plutarck wrote: The only reason I am aware of to use PHP as a CGI is on

Re: [PHP] cgi vs. module

2001-04-17 Thread Dan Lowe
Previously, Franklin Hays said: RE: PHP as a CGI or Module Generally people will almost always use the module because it's faster and simpler, and gives you some IPC kind of advantages that the CGI doesn't have ("internal" cross-talk with Apache). Reasons to use the CGI: 1. Windows servers

[PHP] cgi vs. module

2001-04-16 Thread Franklin Hays
RE: PHP as a CGI or Module This has been discussed some but I am interested to see if one is more popular then the other. My experience has been most people run PHP as a apache module but is there a specific benefit to run it as a cgi program? What about very large servers such as web hosts?