<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BLOCKQUOTE CITE STYLE="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px" TYPE="CITE"><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF">With 2) is the idea to have the cgi script switch on each call to<BR>
another process?</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF"><BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF"><BR>
Yup. I figure if I spawn many cgi scripts but they all have to talk to the same long-running process, then I've lost all of the benefits of multiple processes anyway. So yeah- I'm trying to get multiple processes on the cgi end talking to multiple processes over sockets. Of course, if I could accomplish everything I wanted to in a cgi script, I wouldn't bother with the long-running processes.<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE CITE STYLE="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px" TYPE="CITE"></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF">Re: my recent post are you using 2.4.3 with httpd? Having problems with<BR>
my server under 2.4.3...</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF"><BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF"><BR>
I use my own server stack, although it works similarly to httpd. In limited tests, it works fine here under 2.4.3 / MacOS 10.1.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE CITE STYLE="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px" TYPE="CITE"></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF">In terms of IAC - which is what you are doing here right? Do you have<BR>
any info regarding performance and the various techniques that are<BR>
possible (in particular using an external, shell, and sockets)- what do<BR>
you think:<BR>
<BR>
1) Shell (slowest)<BR>
<BR>
2) Sockets<BR>
<BR>
3) Externals (any faster?)<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF"><BR>
I'm really just experimenting, so I don't have much evidence. However, I would say that sockets are probably more efficient that shell calls and using "open process" is probably at least as fast as sockets. I don't think externals would be much help unless under the hood unless they can access something faster than what Metacard already has- and I don't know what that would be!<BR>
<BR>
FWIW,<BR>
Brian<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Geneva" FAMILY="SANSSERIF" SIZE="2" STYLE="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #FFFFFF"></FONT></HTML>