Re: mod_perl survey results
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Perrin Harkins <email@example.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:49 PM, David E. Wheeler <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:[color=green]
>> To a certain degree, Apache/mod_perl is a victim of the success of HTTP. It's
>> fairly easy to implement a new HTTP server, so there are a lot of them, and
>> many are easy to use and extremely fast. If all you're interested in is
>> serving a Rails or Catalyst app, Apache/mod_perl starts to seem like much too
>> big a beast.
> I've said this before, but I think this is not a very rational claim. Network
> servers are actually pretty hard to get right and HTTP is no longer very
Exactly. Anyone trying to make their own HTTP server will simply end
up re-treading the same path that apache has already traveled--with
all the pitfalls that entails. HTTP serving, process management, etc.
is not the core function of most apps. The "OSS way" is to build on
the work of others.
Apache is and has been "solving the HTTP/server problem" for many
years. Choosing not to stand on the shoulders of that giant should be
done only with a very good reason. And sometimes there are good
reasons. But what I tend to see just as often are fads and other herd
behavior (e.g., the long (ongoing) trail of HTTP server/interfaces
used with Rails).