Re: FastCgiExternalServer vs FastCgiServer for runing php-fastcgi

On Monday 18 October 2004 01:30 pm, Simon wrote:
> There is no downside I know of. The communication is done over unix
> socket in both cases, you just share the same pool of FastCGI PHP
> processes. For example, if you have more than one vhost under the
> same UID, you would use this to share the same FPHP pool instead of
> having a separate one for each vhost, thus using less server
> resources. There is rarely a case where you would want to have 2 or
> more separate FPHP pools for the same UID spread among different
> vhosts. Read up on FastCgiExternalServer w/ unix sockets and you will
> understand how to do this.

I understand HOW to do it, just wanted to make sure I understood WHY I 
should do it.  I'm pretty experienced unix sysadmin but haven't done 
much with FastCGI up until now.  Since the FAQ example didn't use 
external, I was concerned there might be some aspect I was missing, 
other than the load balancing opportunities afforded by tcp 
implementation.  Appreciate the insights from those more experienced 
than I.

-- 
Best regards,

Ken Gunderson
GPG Key-- 9F5179FD

"Freedom begins between the ears."      -- Edward Abbey
___________________________________
fastcgi-developers mailing list
http://fastcgi.com/fastcgi-developers/