[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ITP: speedy cgi ("persistent" perl scripts)



> (i think it's slightly misnamed upstream - you can use this for a lot more than
> just cgi scripts)

The correct name is "SpeedyCGI".  On CPAN it's known as "CGI::SpeedyCGI",
mainly because it had to be put under the CGI directory.

CGI is the main thing it was designed for, but yes, it could be used
in other places where persistent perl is needed.  If you have any
good examples, I'll add them into the documentation.

> there's also an optional apache module available for this which i
> haven't included in the package because a) i don't know how to
> packege apache modules - debian/rules patches or suggestions are
> welcome, and b) it looks like it's an upstream experiment that is
> being abandoned.

If you learn anything about the apache module rules, etc, send them
over and I'll put them into the source.  Currently the module is
compiled into apache -- it's not a DSO.  That may be a problem.

The Apache module is *not* being abandoned.  It's kind-of new (just
came out in 1.8), but it's going to be around from now on -- it allows
SpeedyCGI to get similar performance to mod_perl.

But, even without the apache module, it's still quite a bit better
performance than normal CGI (maybe 10x speed).

> compiled for perl 5.004 - i have updated to the new perl standards
> but i am holding back on installing 5.005 until dselect stops
> wanting to uninstall lots of useful stuff.
> 
> 
> Package: speedy-cgi-perl
> Architecture: i386
> Depends: ${perl:Depends} 
> Suggests: libcgi-pm-perl
> Description: speed up perl scripts by making them persistent.
> SpeedyCGI is a way to run perl scripts persistently, which usually
> makes them run much more quickly because it avoids the overhead of
> starting up a new perl interpreter and compiling the perl code.
> It is most often used for CGI scripts but it can be used to speed
> up most perl programs.
> 
> 
> will upload later today.
> 
> craig
> 
> --
> craig sanders


Reply to: