Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of olafvdspek@gmail.com designates
 209.85.210.189 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=fiDaGNhpXGhlfOBHunS5ZpGX+W5SAL5jhnZ4UVMF9VxST7CQ58HjsQ1g6198xBPHIv
         WEzRUuSS2shZ5N8j69/lICFYQ7cs7Js2U1Fg6vwGzlrODAG1Js3IgHQSaHPW1eKz8yXb
         AgzgLt0Bb9mppP8e0xSqXdlTn9boEqz7h1pCc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <cc67648e0911240803n56977fbar1054eef36feb7a32@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1082520665@web.de>
	 <cc67648e0911240724l25d2e507ua8a6482e341b0acc@mail.gmail.com>
	 <b2cc26e40911240734h162bf7f8t7a26613a82b4c765@mail.gmail.com>
	 <cc67648e0911240747m6c80c0celd350b53cf0c93038@mail.gmail.com>
	 <b2cc26e40911240758xbfbc7dalf97407366ffa681f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <cc67648e0911240803n56977fbar1054eef36feb7a32@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:08:42 +0100
Message-ID: <b2cc26e40911240808p574641c9xba11007ffd0999b3@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [mod_fcgid] Feedback / Suggestions
From: Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What advantages does fcgid have over proxy_fcgi (except being ready)?
>
> integrated, on-demand process management

How valuable is that?
In most cases a static number of backends seems fine.

>> mod_fcgid isn't in 2.2, right?
>
> mod_fcgid is actually not bundled with the HTTP server. =C2=A0It is
> released on its own cycle, and supports httpd 2.0.x, 2.2.x, and trunk
> (future httpd 2.4.x) with one delivery.

Ah, nice. What's the reason it's not bundled though?

In this case, I'd love to see support for TCP/IP backends too.
Shouldn't be too hard to implement.

>> So what's the plan for 2.4? Have both of them? Or is mod_proxy_fcgi
>> expected to be not ready for 2.4?
>
> mod_fcgid will support 2.4. =C2=A0proxy-fcgi folk(s), care to speak up on=
 your baby?

Olaf