running both versions - php 4.3.0 and php 5 on one Apache-Server on Windows [message #17463] |
Wed, 31 March 2004 07:49 |
ZloBy
Messages: 1 Registered: March 2004 Location: Germany
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Hi all, I use now php 4.3.0 and have many scripts and won't it uninstall or delete.
But I will now testing some things with the new one version: php 5.
How can I run the both versions of php on the same Apache 2.0 Server on Windows?
Is this posible?
Thanks and regards!
Nikolay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: running both versions - php 4.3.0 and php 5 on one Apache-Server on Windows [message #31411 is a reply to message #17463] |
Fri, 21 April 2006 09:29 |
richardlynch
Messages: 8 Registered: April 2006
Karma: 0
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Also, CGI isn't always "much" slower than Module.
If the CGI binary and the HTTP children can all fit into RAM cache, then the hard drive doesn't get hit on every page load.
Once your CGI gets page-faulted to hard drive though, on a busy server, things go bad really fast.
[Or so I understand it...]
I did not read all the articles from the FAQT link, but if none of them discuss the ProxyPass option of running 2 apache servers, but having one of them "front" for the other, so you can get PHP as module on the 2 pools, while keeping a common "face" to the world, then you need to search PHP-General for Rasmus Lerdorf's post about this.
As far as missing features in CGI, the biggie is HTTP Authentication, as I recall. Apache/PHP are unwilling to schlep your HTTP Auth user/pass through the CGI command, as it would be visible to anybody who can run "ps auxwwww" and catch it as it goes by. (This is from memory from years ago, mind you, so I could be "off" a bit...)
There are also some real esoteric functions/features you are unlikely to notice at all missing from CGI -- So esoteric I've forgotten what they are. Again, years old info, so maybe there's more now that gets lost going from Module to CGI.
For the average webhosted shared site, a change from Module to CGI probably won't impact you at all, except possibly the speed issue -- And your webhost is probably fairly confident on that one, or they'd not go this route.
|
|
|