Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: Question on multi-process CGID
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:06:47 +0530
Message-ID: 
 <54483C7604F3544BB7B818DF7B3680480238FAB1@qcaexc02.asiapacific.cpqcorp.net>
In-Reply-To: <DD76000E-7FFB-42D9-A16B-51DEB0E1486B@holsman.net>
Thread-Topic: Question on multi-process CGID
Thread-Index: AcdyWwPqRwgB1//BQOKIy4hL3cyyIAAKZeUQ
From: "Mendonce, Kiran (STSD)" <kiran.mendonce@hp.com>
To: <dev@httpd.apache.org>

The problem with that would be HP does not package mod_fastcgi and
customers are always reluctant to change their existing scripts.

We tried the multi CGID approach and on multiple CPU machines, there was
an improvement in performance.

Regards,
Kiran

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Holsman [mailto:lists@holsman.net]=20
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 4:54 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question on multi-process CGID

tackling this another way.
how hard would it be to use something like mod_fastcgi of instead of the
standard CGI interface?

On 21/06/2006, at 8:00 AM, Paul Querna wrote:

> Mendonce, Kiran (STSD) wrote:
>>
>> We tried using mod_cgi with worker. And its very slow. So that's not=20
>> an option we have. Currently we have only worker MPM supported on=20
>> HP-UX which is why I tried the multiple cgid approach.
>
> Ah. Now it makes sense.  My experiences with this have only been on=20
> Linux, FreeBSD and Solaris.  It is very much a possibility that fork()

> on HP-UX really sucks.
>
>> And the solution that was discussed then was also to provide multiple

>> CGI daemons. Will this be a feature that will be available sometime ?
>
> I don't think anyone is currently working on it. Feel Free to post=20
> patches :)
>
>> Also, I'd like to know if any benchmaking results for CGI has been=20
>> published with comparisons between the different Apache MPMs.
>
> Never done it on HP-UX.  On Linux 2.6 the experimental Event MPM is=20
> fastest, then the Worker MPM and then the Prefork MPM.
>
> -Paul
>