Re: php 5 installation problem

At 01:39 AM 3/17/2006, - Edwin - wrote:

Hi! On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 20:45:29 -0400 Miles Thompson <miles@allnovascotia.com> wrote: At 06:23 PM 3/16/2006, Anthony Ettinger wrote:

[...] Is there a drawback to running php5 as CGI?

Anthony, I really don't know, because computers are much faster, so there may not be the time lags there were 10 years ago. As I understand CGI, the web server sees that the page is of type .php, starts up PHP, PHP processes the page, the web server shuts down PHP and sends out the results. The overhead of starting and stopping PHP (or Perl, etc.) was the complaint. When PHP is loaded as an Apache module there is not startup / shutdown overhead. If I have this wrong, or if PHP5 as a CGI stays resident and there is no penalty, will someone please correct me. No, nothing wrong there, I think. But there are other differences. (Like some functions not working, etc.) Pros and cons, one might say. Anyway, here are some results of a quick google search: http://www.google.com/search?q=php+CGI+module+difference Hmm.. I just couldn't find it but there should be a page about it on www.php.net ... (^_-) Regards - Miles HTH, - Edwin -

Thanks Edwin. I guess it was too late and I couldn't formulate a proper search expression. I'd like to hear Chris Shiflet's opinion on the security advantages of running PHP5 as CGI. Why, after years of running PHP as an Apache module, the sudden conversion to CGI operation? I've noticed occasional references of PHP5 "having issues" with CPanel. Is it simply easier for ISPs, given the intense competitive cost pressures they are under, to not wrestle with these issues, but to say "Here it is as a CGI if you want it." Regards - Miles Thompson -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 3/10/2006