Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 86505 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2006 15:59:23 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Mar 2006 15:59:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 96684 invoked by uid 500); 6 Mar 2006 15:59:43 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 96632 invoked by uid 500); 6 Mar 2006 15:59:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 96621 invoked by uid 99); 6 Mar 2006 15:59:43 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:59:43 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of rooneg@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.200 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.182.200] (HELO nproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.182.200) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:59:42 -0800 Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id a25so914250nfc for ; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:59:19 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=NlQ9zhoIJT+HB64kQ9+e4qG80NEOufku0NPeCxLU/ftKQdLoTdBw7Pg4ojpPlxUbJ1Vgrsakxjv3KQOUS1/3EHDPBJgtsm1Sk0rWaVNqwQ14Yljk3Rz+1WX7RXVsmgzyAA6IMNqW7+/qlS8mXrrwHTWP7hYY2q69kGaFUa1RmWY= Received: by 10.48.226.12 with SMTP id y12mr2496403nfg; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 07:59:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.49.64.11 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 07:59:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <7edfeeef0603060759x72becfc2g3ae6d4caf676c30f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 07:59:18 -0800 From: "Garrett Rooney" Sender: rooneg@gmail.com To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: Should fastcgi be a proxy backend? Cc: jim@jagunet.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <200603061318.k26DIgS12168@devsys.jaguNET.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 3/6/06, Sascha Schumann wrote: > > > Also, we tend to run most of our fastcgi's using a domain socket. I'= m > > > sure others do that as well. > > > > > > > Isn't that very unreliable? > > Why should Unix domain sockets be unreliable? Yeah, that's my question as well. Quite a few people seem to use them... -garrett