Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:47493 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 93772 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2010 17:25:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 23 Mar 2010 17:25:31 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=tony@daylessday.org; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=tony@daylessday.org; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain daylessday.org designates 89.208.40.236 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: tony@daylessday.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 89.208.40.236 mail.daylessday.org Linux 2.6 Received: from [89.208.40.236] ([89.208.40.236:41020] helo=daylessday.org) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 33/C4-03444-989F8AB4 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:25:30 -0500 Received: from [192.168.3.178] (unknown [212.42.62.198]) by daylessday.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 065C9BFA085; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:25:26 +0300 (MSK) Message-ID: <4BA8F985.1090109@daylessday.org> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:25:25 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 SUSE/3.0.1-1.2 Thunderbird/3.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: jani.taskinen@iki.fi CC: php-dev References: <4BA8EF6F.8010503@daylessday.org> <4BA8F72E.5090701@sci.fi> In-Reply-To: <4BA8F72E.5090701@sci.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] FPM RFC From: tony@daylessday.org (Antony Dovgal) On 03/23/2010 08:15 PM, Jani Taskinen wrote: > 23.3.2010 18:42, Antony Dovgal wrote: >> Hello all. >> >> Derick (and other people) asked me to create an RFC for FPM describing what it is and why do we need it. >> Quite.. ahem.. laconic version of such RFC can be found here: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/fpm >> >> I'm open for your questions. > > Does it really need to be separate SAPI? I mean, just replace the old sapi/cgi > with it? Keep the name 'cgi' though. :) I don't see any need to touch sapi/cgi at all. Keeping both CGI and FastCGI in one SAPI leads to a nasty code mess with lots of "if (fcgi_is_fastcgi()) {" as you can now see in cgi_main.c. sapi/fpm and sapi/cgi now have quite different codebase as we've dropped some stuff not pertinent to FastCGI (there might be some leftovers, I'll deal with them later). -- Wbr, Antony Dovgal --- http://pinba.org - realtime statistics for PHP