[Zope-dev] Re: [Zope] PCGI?

[Jeff Rush]

I had thought (obviously incorrectly) that mod_proxy was hard to 
configure correctly to pass all headers, particularly in complex virtual 
hosting scenarios.  But I'm no Apache expert.

And I thought that mod_redirect added overhead to every request, doing 
the redirect cycle via the browser.  It also exposed the port 8000-based 
Zope to direct access, which some admin's might not want.

But mostly I thought PCGI (and FastCGI) was the preferred way, since it 
is covered in detail in Zope's doc/WEBSERVER.TXT and neither mod_proxy 
nor mod_redirect are mentioned in there. ;-)

I just figured PCGI was cleaner and let me delegate responsibility to 
each hosting client, to manage their own CGI-BIN stuff w/o access to 
Apache's config files..

So if we drop PCGI, we'll need an action item to rework that file and 
perhaps ZopeBook et. al.

-Jeff



Tim Hoffman wrote:
> 
> I have always run Zope behind Apache utilising mod_proxy.
> 
> I have to admit I never tried or really even evaluated pcgi, and don't 
> build it when I install Zope.
> 
> Is there a benefit of pcgi over using mod_proxy ?


Guido van Rossum wrote:
 >
 > AFAIK most people use Apache's mod_redirect to a Zope HTTP server
 > running at (e.g.) port 8000.  No additional software needed.

> On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 09:16, Jeff Rush wrote:
> 
>>Having only ever used Zope-behind-PCGI myself, if we drop it, what would 
>>be the prevailing approach for running Zope behind Apache?  Has everyone 
>>switched to FastCGI (or Quixote's SCGI) but me?