fastcgi vs mod_perl

[Matt S Trout]

Steve Mynott wrote:
> On Wed, July 19, 2006 4:19 pm, Dirk Koopman wrote:
>> Has anyone done any benchmarking of fastcgi vs mod_perl at all?
> 
> There have been benchmarks in the past but as with all such benchmarks
> they tend to be pretty worthless.
> 
> Once you have a persistant perl process of any sort I doubt whether being
> able to shovel data slightly more rapidly over a form submit and getting a
> request back a a tad faster makes much real difference compared to coding,
> network and database issues for most web applications.  Hell, CGI is still
> fine for most people.

If memory serves, apache+FCGI isn't much different to apache+mod_perl, but 
lighttpd+FCGI is a substantial difference. Of course I don't have numbers 
handy to back this up, and apache+mod_perl+perlbal or +squid or whatever is a 
different matter again.

Personally I tend to go for FCGI by default simply for simplicity of 
deployment and management; mod_perl strikes me as a rotary belt-fed nailgun 
and usually all I want is a hammer.

-- 
      Matt S Trout       Offering custom development, consultancy and support
   Technical Director    contracts for Catalyst, DBIx::Class and BAST. Contact
Shadowcat Systems Ltd.  mst (at) shadowcatsystems.co.uk for more information

+ Help us build a better perl ORM: http://dbix-class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ +