Re: mod_fastcgi v1.4.3 vs 2.0b2

freeform (freeform@wired.com)
Fri, 18 Jul 1997 10:21:45 -0700 (PDT)

Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 10:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: freeform <freeform@wired.com>
To: Mike Baptiste <baptiste@nortel.ca>
Subject: Re: mod_fastcgi v1.4.3 vs 2.0b2
In-Reply-To: <199707181606.MAA19841@relay.openmarket.com>
Message-Id: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970718101641.7681B-100000@get.wired.com>



On 18 Jul 1997, Mike Baptiste wrote:

> 
> I'm running Apache 1.2.1 and am wondering if I should stick with 1.4.3 or 
> is 2.0b2 stable enough?  Also, does it offer much over 1.4.3?  I read a 
> little about the dynamic process mgmt, but...  
> 
bianca.com is using apache_1.2 on solaris_2.5.1
and when i tried using mod_fastcgi_2.0b2 i had nothing but problems.
and i mean MAJOR PROBLEMS.
the entire bianca.com site was completely unstable
while mod_fastcgi_2.0b2 was in place.
i also had to spend many hours tweaking the dynamic dir and mbox stuff
to even get the sucker to run.

i definitely recommend staying with 1.4.3.


{freeform}