Apache vs Xitami: mod_rebol, FastCGI, LWRP

[1/2] from: jmalv::hotmail::com at: 12-Dec-2001 17:45

Hi, Has anybody looked side by side at Apache vs Xitami for very busy sites. I understand Xitami main drawback is that it doesn�t support HTTP 1.1 so I imagine that impacts client performance when retrieving pages with lots of graphics. What are Xitami benefits wrt REBOL, if any ? The other aspect I am not clear on is which is the best solution for REBOL script performace, i.e. 1. An Apache native module for REBOL e.g. mod_rebol (not available AFAIK) 2. FastCGI on either Apache or Xitami (with Rebol/Command) 3. LWRP for Xitami (with the script available in the library or other solutions) Also, how easy is it to swap between REBOL an C/C++ code (which might be required for some slow pages). Any insights would be great. THanks _________________________________________________________________ Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

[2/2] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 12-Dec-2001 20:17

Jose Manuel Alvarez wrote:

> Hi, > Has anybody looked side by side at Apache vs Xitami for very busy sites.

<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>

> 1. An Apache native module for REBOL e.g. mod_rebol (not available AFAIK) > 2. FastCGI on either Apache or Xitami (with Rebol/Command)

I use FastCGI set-up here. Works fine, althoug there are some limitations if used under Windows, - only ExternalApp directive is supported. I can't compare its performance though, as I only tested Apache + FastCGI + Rebol, but several folks here use Xitami + Rebol + lrwp protocol, which is free and you can find it in library section of View desktop. -pekr-

Notes

Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted