[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Anyone try the new fcgi-0.8.6 yet?

Thursday

4/8/2005 7:13:00 PM

Hi,

Looks like fcgi-0.8.6 was released a few days ago here:

http://raa.ruby-lang.org/pro...

I was wondering if anyone else tried using it and found it stable enough
for production use.

Thanks
2 Answers

Aredridel

4/8/2005 7:28:00 PM

0

On Apr 8, 2005 1:14 PM, Thursday <nospam@nospam.nospam.nospam.nospam.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Looks like fcgi-0.8.6 was released a few days ago here:
>
> http://raa.ruby-lang.org/pro...
>

A rough change-log (from the difference from the previous release)

* My patch to search one additional location for fastcgi headers (PLD
puts them in a subdirectory, so they are included as #include
<fastcgi/fastcgi.h>

* Report fastcgi communication errors as exceptions, instead of
silently going wrong. Expect to see subclasses of Errno raised when
communication fails.

* Kirk Haine's memory leak fix

That's it. It's good to go for production use. The patch is small and
simple. There's not much change that could go wrong. Several people
are using most of these changes in production use already.

Go for it.

Ari

khaines

4/8/2005 10:31:00 PM

0

Thursday wrote:

> Looks like fcgi-0.8.6 was released a few days ago here:
>
> http://raa.ruby-lang.org/pro...
>
> I was wondering if anyone else tried using it and found it stable enough
> for production use.

I have abused the _heck_ out of FCGI with two of the three patches that
comprise the 0.8.5 to 0.8.6 changes, pushing millions of requests through
it as fast as I could, and it now exhibits good stability, good
performance, and flat memory usage.

I have, to date, been running mod_ruby for most of my production
installations, but I am making a shift to FCGI now, as it's faster and
offers much greater scalability for me, and with the recent patches, I have
no worries about stability in a production environent.

It is currently being used in one fairly important application in the
financial market I work in, and in the next few months will see deployment
into a number of other applications, some of which could be quite large.

I definitely think the FCGI code needs some work work, but I'll expound on
that in a different thread on the FCGI gem.


Kirk Haines