[Zope] Re: Zope digest, Vol 1 #289 - 28 msgs

[Michel Pelletier]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew J. Probst [mailto:matthew@home.yak.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 3:35 PM
> To: zope@zope.org
> Subject: [Zope] Re: Zope digest, Vol 1 #289 - 28 msgs
> 
> 
> I guess I'm confused as to the "accepted" way to get virtual 
> hosts running
> under Zope, if such a thing even exists.
> 
> I have two domains that I would like to use Zope with.  A 
> company I work
> for would like to host many domains with Zope.  As far as I see, there
> would be two approaches to this on the Zope side:
> 
> 1.  Redirecting different parts of the URI namespace to 
> different parts
>     of Zope's internal database
> 2.  Redirecting different parts of the URI namespace to different Zope
>     processes.
> 
> I can see where (1) would be beneficial for different virtual 
> domains that
> need to access much of the same information, and where (2) would be
> beneficial for modularizing sites into independent units.
> 
> I've looked in the archives, and looked at postings here, and really
> wonder whether the question I'm thinking about is the one answered by
> people posting various Rewrite rules here.
> 
> Of course there is the parallel issue of which web server to use to
> redirect the URI namespace.  I have Apache, and I'm 
> interested in ZServer
> in the alpha version, but I understand that that is 
> unsupported.

ZServer definatly isn't unsuported, but it is beta, which means you may
run into bugs.  We would love to hear about any bugs you run into.  Now,
in the case that ZServer doesn't impliment a feature you want, that
would have to be submitted as a feature request to the Collector for
consideration to be included in the next or subsequent releases.

Note that although ZServer is beta, Zope 2.0 is *alpha*.

>  However,
> for the sake of conversation and understanding, can the ZServer in the
> alpha distribution accomplish the same role as Apache, in redirecting
> different virtual domains to seperate Zope processes or 
> seperate trees of
> the Z object database?
> 

ZServer doesn't have nearly the configurability of Apache.  The short
answer is no, although I bet a good python programmer could hack up a
quick solution to their specific problem rather well.

> Assuming that ZServer and Apache do or would eventually 
> support this mode
> of operation, would ZServer offer better resource usage through its
> multithreaded nature?

The jury is still out on that questions.  Zope 2.0 appears to be
definatly much faster than 1.x w/ ZServer, but substantive analysis has
not been done with Andrew's new mod_pcgi apache module.  I suspect that
ZServer and Apache+mod_pcgi will similarly.

What ZServer buys you is the ability to do webdav (which Apache can also
do, if you patch it) and especialy FTP and XML-RPC (protocols Apache
can't, and never will speak).  Note however, that Apache can work *with*
ZServer using pcgi, so Apache+mod_pcgi+ZServer will get you all the
benefits: Apache's configurability as a webserver, mod_pcgi and
ZServer's speed, webdav, FTP, and XML-RPC support.

-Michel

> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
> http://www.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
> 
> (For developer-specific issues, use the companion list,
> zope-dev@zope.org - http://www.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
>