[cgiapp] The benefits of vanilla CGI vs. FastCGI

[P Kishor]

On 11/23/08, Mark Stosberg <mark at summersault.com> wrote:
>
>  There's running Vista on computers built before 2006, and there's the new crop
>  of web frameworks which need FastCGI or mod_perl to have decent performance to
>  run "Hello World".
>
>  Then there's CGI::Application, which continues to perform well under
>  CGI while easily being run under FastCGI and mod_perl as well.
>
>  Some ask "Why bother with vanilla CGI anymore?"
>
>  I have a few answers for them.
>
>  http://mark.stosberg.com/blog/2008/11/the-benefits-of-vanilla-cgi-vs-fastcgi-for-perl-apps.html
>
>     Mark
>


Mark,

Nice write-up. A few responses --

1. Provide a link to, or better yet, include the number from your
recent web framework benchmarking;

2. Each of the examples you have provided where vanilla cgi might make
a lot of sense are, in my view, ridiculously low powered. My
off-the-cuff reaction would be that vanilla cgi is suitable for,
perhaps, even much much more high use/traffic/load applications. Would
be nice to get some kind of numbers... "cgi use is perfectly ok for
upto 10,000 requests per day applications" or "100 requests per
minute" kind of numbers. That would give a better, and perhaps more
realistic sense of cgi's robustness, particularly under load.

3. Finally, maybe it is time to re-christen CGI::Application to
Web::Application.

-- 
Puneet Kishor http://punkish.eidesis.org/
Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/
Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo) http://www.osgeo.org/