[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Gerd Stolpmann <info@g...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] jserv vs fastcgi |
Am Son, 2003-04-20 um 14.32 schrieb Jeff Henrikson:
> I periodically hear commotion on this list about Jserv. Ocamlnet has a
> Jserv interface now I see. Can somebody explain to me what the
> advantages of Jserv are over FastCGI? FastCGI I know is old ('96), but
> it seems to serve my main goal, which is to keep my process alive so
> that I can pool ODBC connections. The specification is something that
> I can sit down and read in 30 minutes and understand:
>
> http://www.fastcgi.com/devkit/doc/fcgi-spec.html#S1
>
> I haven't seen a specification for just Jserv. Apparently it's
> superseded by the Java Servelet spec, which in version 2.4 is a 309
> page PDF file, chock full of bells and whistles which I haven't taken
> the time to taxonomize, specified in notation which I don't understand.
> It writes everything based on Java method calls, which doesn't give me
> a sense of what the actual data being passed along the channel is at
> all.
>
> I guess I also don't have a good sense of why FastCGI has been
> neglected enough to, for example, not be updated for HTTP 1.1 keepalive
> and etc. Though it sounds like there have been hacks to do this from
> time to time. The fastcgi mailing list seems to be fairly active.
>
> Would anybody with an understanding of this be so kind as to explain
> the big picture in a couple of paragraphs, if that's at all a
> reasonable request? My inclination right now is to sit down and write
> a fastcgi interface and configure Apache with mod_fastcgi, but I don't
> want to do that and find out I'm using a senselessly obsolete interface.
Well, when I selected the JServ protocol (=AJP), the main reason was its
simplicity. You don't need 309 pages to describe it, the network
protocol is much simpler (it's basically CGI over a socket).
Furthermore, many people used it, and it is included in every Linux
distro.
I never compared AJP with fastcgi, I just picked something that worked.
The disadvantage of AJP is that there have been numerous and frequent
updates of the protocol since AJP-1.2 (what I implemented for O'Caml).
Up to now, even the newest JK connector supports the old version 1.2,
but this will likely change some day, and we need an implementation for
a newer version.
Gerd
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Gerd Stolpmann * Viktoriastr. 45 * 64293 Darmstadt * Germany
gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de http://www.gerd-stolpmann.de
------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners