schweini has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:
Hello, again...
Has anybody any experience with using HTTP::Daemon instead of Apache for web-based intranet-Apps?
I'm not using a lot (or any, IIRC) of the more advanced features of Apache anyhow, and since perl has to be installed anyhow on our servers, i thought that this would make deployment easier, and may even get mod_perl-y performance (since most of mod_perl's performance boost is due to the embedded perl interpreter, which HTTP:Daemon obviously would provide 'out of the box' via do(), i figured).
It just seems to me that running a full-flegged Apache(2) only for executing a couple of CGIs and serving some static files is a bit of an overkill (and resource drain).
so, has anybody tried this, or does anyone know any obvious problems with this approach (performance, resources, configurations, overlooked difficulty of implementation)?
thanks for any pointers,
-schweini
Has anybody any experience with using HTTP::Daemon instead of Apache for web-based intranet-Apps?
I'm not using a lot (or any, IIRC) of the more advanced features of Apache anyhow, and since perl has to be installed anyhow on our servers, i thought that this would make deployment easier, and may even get mod_perl-y performance (since most of mod_perl's performance boost is due to the embedded perl interpreter, which HTTP:Daemon obviously would provide 'out of the box' via do(), i figured).
It just seems to me that running a full-flegged Apache(2) only for executing a couple of CGIs and serving some static files is a bit of an overkill (and resource drain).
so, has anybody tried this, or does anyone know any obvious problems with this approach (performance, resources, configurations, overlooked difficulty of implementation)?
thanks for any pointers,
-schweini
Back to
Seekers of Perl Wisdom