On Sunday 20 December 2009, Ryan Malayter wrote:
> On Friday, December 18, 2009, Yuval Hager <yhager@yhager.com> wrote:
> > Will this approach work for fcgi too? I am trying to stay apache-free.
> > Also the app (Drupal-5 hacked) does not support reverse proxy without
> > careful patching.
>
> I think proxy_cache works for fastcgi as well, but I am not positive.

But how? the docs say that proxy_pass is looking for a URL.

> If your app doesn't support reverse proxy, it is probably broken for
> many people on the Internet,

That's true.

> Fix Drupal maybe? It is open source ;-)
>

This is already done in the latest version(7), and patches exist for my (5)
version. However, since it was already pretty hacked when I came along,
patching it is not as easy as running 'patch -p0'.

> > Is there any performance comparison for nginx with fcgi/php vs
> > apache/mod- php?
> > My reasoning was that since I don't need a full blown web server in the
> > back, it better just be a php processor, so I went the fcgi route. f
> > means fast, doesn't it?
>
> I think it likely depends more on the perfoance of you fastcgi wrapper
> for PHP than the web server. That's where the bottleneck is usually.
>

What is a fastcgi wrapper? I am just running /usr/bin/php-cgi..

-- yuval
_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx