Re: PHP Proxy -- WEB400

Subject: Re: PHP Proxy
From: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/web400>
List-help: <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:web400@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

From: Alfredo Delgado
Has anyone looked into the benefits of this configuration vs. directing
traffic directly to the instance in PASE?

The same question was puzzling me too. Why have an extra server for I/O to pass through? Seems like unnecessary overlap; a potential bottleneck or failure point.

But there could be a good reason for it. What if you configure the first HTTP server to start 5,000 threads, but the second to start 20? Would that be good?

Nathan.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.