perl-embperl mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Beau E. Cox" <>
Subject Re: EMBPerl 2.0 vs. EMBPerl 1.3
Date Wed, 31 Mar 2004 00:05:06 GMT
On Tuesday 30 March 2004 12:39 pm, Neal Gamradt wrote:
> Hello All,
> I am looking into developing a new PostgreSQL database driven website.
> Historically speaking I have used Apache 1.3 with mod_perl and EMBPerl 1.3.
> I like to use FreeBSD as my OS of choice on web servers.  EMBPerl 1.3 has
> been rock solid stable and I have wanted to wait a good long time to make
> sure that mod_perl and EMBPerl 2 are stable on Apache 2.0.  Since EMBPerl 2
> is at BETA 11 I am wondering how confident people feel about using it in a
> production environment?  Is mod_perl for Apache 2.0 as stable as mod_perl
> for Apache 1.3?  I don't want to get way too far behind the times and I
> also don't want to move to something that is much less stable than EMBPerl
> 1.3. If people on the mailing list could give me their opinions it would be
> greatly appreciated.  Thanks!

Hi Neal -

I have been using Apache2/mod_per 2/Mason for about nine months on my
personal web site, and for about six months on four web sites I
administer. Very solid. I can not address the comparison between
1.x and 2.x because I have never used Apache 1.x nor mod_perl 1.x.

I am new to Embperl, but have been using it for about two months on my
personal web site. I wish it was totally thread safe so that I could
use the worker MPM, but it works fine under prefork.

I am using everthig 'beta' (CVS) on my personal web site with excellent

My advice: they are ready-for-prime-time, go for it ;)

Aloha => Beau;

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message