Comments on: What PHP Deployment Gets Right

By: Frank Koehl

Frank Koehl — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:42:46 +0000

Continuing the link trail following your post on my blog.

http://frankkoehl.com/2009/01/jeff-atwood-still-wrong-about-php

I’ve never heard the argument (for or against) couched in PHP relationship with Apache, a la mod_php. Brings new perspective to what constitutes the pros and cons.

By: loto sonuçları

loto sonuçları — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 23:55:54 +0000

Excellent excellent article, this is exactly why I prefer to use PHP to any other language

By: araba

araba — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 23:55:06 +0000

Not directly related to your point; your article prompted me to blurb about the differences between mod_(perl|php|python) from a closer to the metal standpoint

By: pnu

pnu — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:16:48 +0000

About mod_perl .. If you want to sandbox your mod_perl stuff, shouldn’t you use “PerlOptions +Parent” option like this:

http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/user/config/config.html#C_Parent_

You will then have your own (or pool of) Perl interpreters for every virtualhost .. or even for a specific directories under one vhost.

If you need the simplicity of PHP, and just want to put your stuff under the document root directory and start coding, HTML::Mason is a good choice with very gentle learning curve. When you need more (for example to separate your DB logic to a separate “model” .pm), it allows you to use any native Perl module, as all Mason templates/components are just Perl.

In a multi-site environment, just setup own INC path for every site/customer and run the interpreters in own sandboxes (as described above). For MVC, use Catalyst. You can still use Mason as a View.

By: Yosifov Pavel

Yosifov Pavel — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:57:32 +0000

Ian, what you think: can Lua (build on C libraries like PHP, but more flexible) man PHP, fill it’s place in Web? Potentially it’s possible. (But Lua, I suppose, aims to accomplish the Web in other way…)

By: Kents

Kents — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:25:18 +0000

Saludos,

Gracias a artículos o comentarios como estos, seguiremos trabajando con PHP. Desde hace mucho tiempo desarrollo con php y hasta ahora no he encontrado algo mejor para trabajar mis aplicaciones web’s. Espero que siga así por mucho tiempo, buena esa Bicking..!

By: Graeme

Graeme — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 05:55:45 +0000

It is very easy to get a PHP installation up and running with adequate debugging for simple scripts, or for simple customisations of existing ones.

This also means that PHP apps (Wordpress for example) end up having a huge range of extensions/plugins etc. (getting away with sloppy coding helps).

By: Jack Diederich

Jack Diederich — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:33:18 +0000

Not directly related to your point; your article prompted me to blurb about the differences between mod_(perl|php|python) from a closer to the metal standpoint on my blog.

By: Steve

Steve — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:19:05 +0000

From what I’ve seen WebFaction doesn’t make any changes to the software. They just run each tool’s HTTP server (most come with one) behind their main Apache server. Their control panel makes it easy to configure which domain should go to which tool. It’s very simple but from my experience it’s rock solid and still very fast.

By: JohnSeq

JohnSeq — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:09:32 +0000

If you use mod_fastcgi+perl but add a ‘die’ statement at the end of your (fastcgi) script, your CGI process prespawn but only service one request.

Doesn’t that get you pretty close to mod_php’s sandboxing/etc?

I had to do something like this to address a memory leak. I ‘died’ my script after more than one request, but the same principal applies.