Re: Deployment options

On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 10:53:47AM -0500, Marc D Prewitt wrote:
> Using the apache fastcgi proc manager may be more convenient becuase it 
> handles restarting apps when they die and has a pretty straightforward 
> method for configuration. However, versus using your own proc manager it 
> has the overhead of needing a web server running on the machine.
> 
> The other thing to consider is that if you need multiple copies of your 
> process to run that with apache they are running as separate programs. 
> With your custom process manager it can fork the child processes itself 
> and potentially share resources between them.  This may also be 
> advantageous because restarting a child would be a simple fork instead of 
> a fork and exec perl (compile your script, etc...).

Just to be clear, in external server mode the application is just listening on
a socket and it's up to the application (its process manager) to fork
(or pre-fork) as needed to make sure there's enough application
processes to handle the request load.

Dynamic and Static modes I'm not that clear on.

In static mode (FastCGIServer) there's a separate Process Manager
process that handles running the application.  So any apache child
process contacts that single process manager which exec the
application as needed.  Is that correct?

And in Dynamic mode there's no process manager, so each apache child
manages the fastcgi application process(es).

No, I'm not sure that's correct.

-- 
Bill Moseley
[email protected]

___________________________________
fastcgi-developers mailing list
http://fastcgi.com/fastcgi-developers/