Re: [PHP-WIN] Re: [PHP] Which versions of Apache will PHP 5.3.6 work with??

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Tommy Pham wrote:
>
>> There used to be a VC6 binary release for PHP v5.3.3 at
>> windows.php.net but I don't see a VC6 build for v5.3 now.  Any way,
>> since you're using using Windows, why not just run it as FastCGI?  =
It
>> runs fine on Win2003 (x86), Win7 x64, Win08 (x86 & x64), and Win08r2.
>
> Apache module works just fine and is in many situations much faster than =
fcgi.

I've never tested the difference for performance. If that's the case,
any particular reason to stop support ISAPI for IIS then? or is
FastCGI faster than ISAPI for IIS? Prior to upgrading to PHP v5.3 and
Windows 64bit, I had faster initial response time from ISAPI. Now
with FastCGI, the initial response takes longer. As for performance
difference through repeated requests, I don't notice the difference
between ISAPI v5.2 and FastCGI v5.3.

>
>> Are using a specific Apache module that's why you need to use httpd?
>> If so, you could use the (non official) Apache Lounge's binary.
>
> There are no official builds of Apache, but convenience builds.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Pierre
>
> @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
>

I've meant official in the sense that one could download from the
official/mirror site. Thus it's more trust worthy, in terms of non
malicious code.

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: Re: [PHP-WIN] Re: [PHP] Which versions of Apache will PHP5.3.6 work with??

Try third binary instead of official one.

Best regards,
Sharl.Jimh.Tsin (From China **Obviously Taiwan INCLUDED**)



2011/3/26 Tommy Pham :
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Pierre Joye wrote=
:
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Tommy Pham wrote:
>>
>>> There used to be a VC6 binary release for PHP v5.3.3 at
>>> windows.php.net but I don't see a VC6 build for v5.3 now.  Any way=
,
>>> since you're using using Windows, why not just run it as FastCGI? =C2=
=A0It
>>> runs fine on Win2003 (x86), Win7 x64, Win08 (x86 & x64), and Win08r2.
>>
>> Apache module works just fine and is in many situations much faster than=
fcgi.
>
> I've never tested the difference for performance.  If that's the cas=
e,
> any particular reason to stop support ISAPI for IIS then? or is
> FastCGI faster than ISAPI for IIS?  Prior to upgrading to PHP v5.3 a=
nd
> Windows 64bit, I had faster initial response time from ISAPI.  Now
> with FastCGI, the initial response takes longer.  As for performance
> difference through repeated requests, I don't notice the difference
> between ISAPI v5.2 and FastCGI v5.3.
>
>>
>>> Are using a specific Apache module that's why you need to use httpd?
>>> If so, you could use the (non official) Apache Lounge's binary.
>>
>> There are no official builds of Apache, but convenience builds.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Pierre
>>
>> @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
>>
>
> I've meant official in the sense that one could download from the
> official/mirror site.  Thus it's more trust worthy, in terms of non
> malicious code.
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php