[FASTCGI] FastCGI still a smart choice in 2010?
webmaster at cosmicperl.com
Fri Apr 23 10:07:52 EDT 2010
Not to mention Microsoft releasing FastCGI for IIS 6 & 7.
Tom Bowden wrote:
> Personally - I would get really upset if fastCGI went away -- for the
> exact reason below.
> In our particular case I am not going to expose our tomcat server to
> the outside world or rely on java to process several thousand requests
> a minute (not that it can't -- but I am old and hornery). I LOVE
> fastcgi because it is not related to php/perl or java.
> On Apr 21, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Garrett Wollman wrote:
>> <<On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:32:12 -0700, Sven Svenson
>> <svensvenson3 at gmail.com> said:
>>> What's happened with the attitudes developers have about FastCGI? It
>>> seems that FastCGI is not the preferred way of deploying web
>>> applications outside the Perl world. Are the Java, PHP, Ruby and
>>> Python folks right to be using something other than FastCGI? Is
>>> FastCGI still around only because it is a legacy technology (Cobol is
>>> still around too!) or is FastCGI still a good choice for a high
>>> performance web site?
>> As always, it depends on what your requirements are. We stick with
>> FastCGI because it's programming-environment-independent. We can't
>> tell our users that they have to write in (PHP, Perl, Python, Ruby,
>> Java, ...) so we need to support all of those systems (and the
>> environments that layer on top of them) with a single mechanism. The
>> one that comes closest to fitting the bill is FastCGI. (If anyone can
>> show me a way to run Java crudlets under FastCGI, I'd love to see it,
>> as we occasionally get requests for that.)
>> FastCGI-developers mailing list
>> FastCGI-developers at mailman.fastcgi.com
> FastCGI-developers mailing list
> FastCGI-developers at mailman.fastcgi.com
More information about the FastCGI-developers