Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

To all of you Windows & mod_perl lovers that might be on this list but
not on win32-vanilla, this might be really interesting.
--
Mike

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: kmx
Date: 2010/6/21
Subject: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)
To: win32-vanilla@perl.org


To anyone who might be interested in mod_perl working with Strawberry Perl:

1/ On strawberry perl 5.12.x (32bit) run from command prompt:

perl -MPAR::Dist -e
install_par('http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/mod_perl/ 5.12_x86/mod_perl-2.0.4-MSWin32-x86-multi-thread-5.12.par')
perl -MPAR::Dist -e
install_par('http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/mod_perl/ 5.12_x86/libapreq2-2.12-MSWin32-x86-multi-thread-5.12.par')

All other necessary files (mod_perl.so, mod_apreq2.so, libapreq2.dll)
are available at
http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/mod_perl/5.12_x86/

For sample setup see
http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/mod_perl/README-512.TX T

2/ On strawberry perl 5.10.x (32bit) - run from command prompt:

perl -MPAR::Dist -e
install_par('http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/mod_perl/ 5.10_x86/mod_perl-2.0.4-MSWin32-x86-multi-thread-5.10.par')
perl -MPAR::Dist -e
install_par('http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/mod_perl/ 5.10_x86/libapreq2-2.12-MSWin32-x86-multi-thread-5.10.par')

All other necessary files (mod_perl.so, mod_apreq2.so, libapreq2.dll)
are available at
http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/mod_perl/5.10_x86/

Both should work with Apache-2.2 Win32 binaries either from
http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/binaries/win32/ of from
http://www.apachelounge.com/download/

TESTERS WELCOME - if you are gonna test the above mentioned binaries
please send a feedback either to this list or even better post it to
the RT - http://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=58512

--
kmx

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

Michiel Beijen schrieb am 02.07.2010 um 10:54 (+0200):
> To all of you Windows & mod_perl lovers that might be on this list but
> not on win32-vanilla, this might be really interesting.
> --
> Mike
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: kmx
> Date: 2010/6/21
> Subject: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)
> To: win32-vanilla@perl.org

> For sample setup see
> http://strawberryperl.com/package/kmx/mod_perl/README-512.TX T

Googling for mod_perl and Windows, one of the most prominent hits is
this page from the mod_perl book, which might be somewhat outdated:

http://modperlbook.org/html/2-4-Installing-mod_perl-for-Wind ows.html

To quote:

Because of the many differences between Unix and Windows,
the Win32 port of Apache is still branded as beta
quality—it hasn't yet reached the stability and
performance levels of the native Unix counterpart.

Another hindrance to using mod_perl on Windows is that
current versions of Perl are not thread-safe on Win32. As
a consequence, mod_perl calls to the embedded Perl
interpreter must be serialized (i.e., executed one at a
time). For these reasons, we recommend that mod_perl on
Windows be used only for testing purposes, not in
production.

Does that still hold true? With Apache 2 and all that progress?
What's the status of using mod_perl on Windows?

--
Michael Ludwig

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Michael Ludwig wrote:
> Googling for mod_perl and Windows, one of the most prominent hits is
> this page from the mod_perl book, which might be somewhat outdated:

That book was published in 2003 and is about apache 1 and mod_perl 1.
If that's what you're using, then it's still a good resource. If not,
you should use newer documentation.

> Does that still hold true? With Apache 2 and all that progress?

No, that's just about the older versions.

> What's the status of using mod_perl on Windows?

http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/os/win32/install.html

- Perrin

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

Perrin Harkins schrieb am 09.07.2010 um 13:19 (-0400):
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Michael Ludwig wrote:

> > What's the status of using mod_perl on Windows?
>
> http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/os/win32/install.html

Thanks. Doesn't sound too bad. So it's (1) ActiveState, (2) one of the
All-in-one packages mentioned, or (3) build your own. Or - as announced
by the originator of this thread - (4) Strawberry mod_perl.

I stumbled upon a blog post, which may or may not be relevant, or rather
like the domain name indicates:

The Rise and Fall of mod_perl
http://blog.afoolishmanifesto.com/archives/1303

The title is badly chosen, as it doesn't deal with any rise or fall of
mod_perl, but only with the author's experiences of using mod_perl on
Windows. Could be summarized as follows:

* crashes and leaks running mod_perl on Windows (maybe just FUD, no
indication it was specific to Windows)
* could be fixed
* desire to use Strawberry and CPAN instead of ActiveState and PPM
(the former possibly being more convenient to use)
* no success building mod_perl against Strawberry (no need to do this
any more now as Strawberry offers mod_perl binaries now)
* more crashes on mod_perl/Windows with a Catalyst app
* switch made from mod_perl to Pure Perl Server plus Apache/mod_proxy

Relevant or not, this story makes me ask the following questions:
Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?

--
Michael Ludwig

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

Michael Ludwig wrote:
....
>
> Relevant or not, this story makes me ask the following questions:
> Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
> Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?
>
I use quite a bit of mod_perl under Linux/Apache 2.x/mod_perl 2.x, and have a few customer
systems using the same Apache 2.x/mod_perl 2.x under Windows.
I guess my experience can be termed as positive, since I don't have any problems under
Windows that I don't have under Linux. My coding style is conservative however, and I am
careful from the start to not use anything which /might/ not work cross-platform.

I need, and love, the real cross-platform aspect of Apache/perl/mod_perl.

My only gripe about mod_perl under Windows, is that it is always a bit hard (I don't do
this too often) to figure out again how to download and install it, particularly if the
system to install it on has no direct web access (which happens often in corporate
environments with Windows servers).

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

Le vendredi 09 juillet 2010 à 22:16 +0200, Michael Ludwig a écrit :
> Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
> Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?
>

I have used mod_perl on Windows on bare metal and in a Virtual Machine,
for the app in my sig. The binaries are very easy to install(*) and it
works just fine for a handful of users.

No idea how it scales, but I would not bother anyway.

(* : w/ ActiveState Perl)
--
Vincent Veyron
Logiciel de suivi de dossiers pour les services juridiques
http://marica.fr

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

I have very good experiences with Apache under Windows. Especially with
running under Windows 2008 64 Bit (with 32 bit versions of Apache and Perl).
It runs very fast and comes close to the speed of running under Linux.

One big disadvantage is that you can only run in Worker MPM. If you have a
big modperl application it uses much more memory than with the Prefork MPM
on Linux. Also restarting Apache Worker takes more time then with Prefork
MPM on Linux.

But stability and performance are very good.

--
Thomas den Braber

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Ludwig
To: modperl@perl.apache.org
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 22:16:23 +0200
Subject: Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

> Perrin Harkins schrieb am 09.07.2010 um 13:19 (-0400):
> > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Michael Ludwig
> wrote:
>
> > > What's the status of using mod_perl on Windows?
> >
> > http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/os/win32/install.html
>
> Thanks. Doesn't sound too bad. So it's (1) ActiveState, (2) one of the
> All-in-one packages mentioned, or (3) build your own. Or - as announced
> by the originator of this thread - (4) Strawberry mod_perl.
>
> I stumbled upon a blog post, which may or may not be relevant, or
> rather
> like the domain name indicates:
>
> The Rise and Fall of mod_perl
> http://blog.afoolishmanifesto.com/archives/1303
>
> The title is badly chosen, as it doesn't deal with any rise or fall of
> mod_perl, but only with the author's experiences of using mod_perl on
> Windows. Could be summarized as follows:
>
> * crashes and leaks running mod_perl on Windows (maybe just FUD, no
> indication it was specific to Windows)
> * could be fixed
> * desire to use Strawberry and CPAN instead of ActiveState and PPM
> (the former possibly being more convenient to use)
> * no success building mod_perl against Strawberry (no need to do this
> any more now as Strawberry offers mod_perl binaries now)
> * more crashes on mod_perl/Windows with a Catalyst app
> * switch made from mod_perl to Pure Perl Server plus Apache/mod_proxy
>
> Relevant or not, this story makes me ask the following questions:
> Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
> Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?
>
> --
> Michael Ludwig

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

On 09.07.2010 22:16 Michael Ludwig wrote:

> Relevant or not, this story makes me ask the following questions:
> Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
> Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?

I use it for a web based application but have/had some problems.

First it was very difficult to get a tool chain that works well with
each other: Apache, Perl, mod_perl, several binary modules from
different sources, some from PPM repositories, some self-compiled
because I couldn't find a (recent) precompiled version.
After some "DLL hell" (or whatever incompatibilities) I got a version
that worked quite well by compiling everything myself (except very few
modules where I was not able to do so) with the old MS VC6 compiler
(with some updates and addons from MS).

As I said this worked quite well with one exception: I got memory
problems. I had to restart Apache after some time to reclaim the memory.
This is the reason why I am in the process to migrate the whole thing to
Linux (prefork MPM).
But even then I plan to do development on a Windows box where I still
feel more comfortable. For this the newly announced tool chain with
Strawberry perl might be an option.
Are there other recommendations how to get a well behaving, stable,
extensible (also with XS modules) and modern mod_perl installation for
Windows?

-Michael

RE: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

=20

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Michael Ludwig [mailto:milu71@gmx.de]=20
>Envoy=E9 : vendredi, 9. juillet 2010 22:16
>=C0 : modperl@perl.apache.org
>Objet : Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)
> ...

>Relevant or not, this story makes me ask the following questions:
>Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
>Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?
>

I used to have a Win32 Apache2+mod_perl 2.0 stack with about 400 =
intranet users. Now the production server is on Unix, but I still use =
win32 for some development tasks, so I'm very happy that kmx now =
releases a distribution for Strawberry Perl.=20

To answer the question, the experience is positive, so far I never =
encountered any problems that would be specific to win32.

Laurent Dami

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_2387_01CB226E.E7D230D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm using mod_perl 2 with ActivePerl for development. It works fine with =
one exception:
I have to set in my httpd.conf:

PerlInterpStart 1
PerlInterpMax 1
PerlInterpMinSpare 1
PerlInterpMaxSpare 1

In other words I'm not able to make any use of more than 1 core,
which is not bad for development, but very bad for production.
Setting other values (including defaults) leads to Apache crash sooner
or later. There is no such problems under Linux.

Jacek
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Michael Ludwig=20
To: modperl@perl.apache.org=20
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 10:16 PM
Subject: Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)


Perrin Harkins schrieb am 09.07.2010 um 13:19 (-0400):
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Michael Ludwig =
wrote:

> > What's the status of using mod_perl on Windows?
>=20
> http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/os/win32/install.html

Thanks. Doesn't sound too bad. So it's (1) ActiveState, (2) one of the
All-in-one packages mentioned, or (3) build your own. Or - as =
announced
by the originator of this thread - (4) Strawberry mod_perl.

I stumbled upon a blog post, which may or may not be relevant, or =
rather
like the domain name indicates:

The Rise and Fall of mod_perl
http://blog.afoolishmanifesto.com/archives/1303

The title is badly chosen, as it doesn't deal with any rise or fall of
mod_perl, but only with the author's experiences of using mod_perl on
Windows. Could be summarized as follows:

* crashes and leaks running mod_perl on Windows (maybe just FUD, no
indication it was specific to Windows)
* could be fixed
* desire to use Strawberry and CPAN instead of ActiveState and PPM
(the former possibly being more convenient to use)
* no success building mod_perl against Strawberry (no need to do this
any more now as Strawberry offers mod_perl binaries now)
* more crashes on mod_perl/Windows with a Catalyst app
* switch made from mod_perl to Pure Perl Server plus Apache/mod_proxy

Relevant or not, this story makes me ask the following questions:
Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?

--=20
Michael Ludwig
------=_NextPart_000_2387_01CB226E.E7D230D0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



charset=3Diso-8859-1">

Re: Strawberry perl + mod_perl (call for testers)

Michael Ludwig schrieb am 09.07.2010 um 22:16 (+0200):
> Are there any people on this list using mod_perl 2.0 on Windows?
> Do you have any positive or negative experiences to share?

Folks, thanks for your input on using mod_perl on Windows. The bottom
line to draw based on your feedback seems to be that this combination is
usable on Windows without hassle, certainly for development, possibly
for production, too.

--
Michael Ludwig