Comments on: Major revision of FastCGI/PHP article on IIS.NET http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/ IIS, FastCGI, PHP and other interesting stuff Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:19:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: RuslanY Blog http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/comment-page-1/#comment-322 RuslanY Blog Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:37:41 +0000 http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/#comment-322 <strong>Windows Installer for PHP 5.2.9 RC and PHP 5.3 Beta...</strong> I am pleased to let everyone know that PHP development community has made significant improvements to the installer in upcoming PHP releases. In particular a number of bugs have been fixed to make the installer work well with FastCGI extension in IIS 5... Windows Installer for PHP 5.2.9 RC and PHP 5.3 Beta…

I am pleased to let everyone know that PHP development community has made significant improvements to the installer in upcoming PHP releases. In particular a number of bugs have been fixed to make the installer work well with FastCGI extension in IIS 5…

]]> By: ruslany http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/comment-page-1/#comment-90 ruslany Thu, 06 Nov 2008 06:28:04 +0000 http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/#comment-90 For MaxInstances there is no technical reason for the difference in defaults. One value is not better than the other. For development purposes either of the defaults would work fine. For production deployment you would probably need to fine tune this number anyway to achieve full CPU load. For MaxInstances there is no technical reason for the difference in defaults. One value is not better than the other. For development purposes either of the defaults would work fine. For production deployment you would probably need to fine tune this number anyway to achieve full CPU load.

]]> By: Franklin Tse http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/comment-page-1/#comment-84 Franklin Tse Wed, 05 Nov 2008 02:13:36 +0000 http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/#comment-84 Thanks! However, besides the InstanceMaxRequests, the MaxInstances default has also been changed from 10 to 4. Is 4 better than 10? Thanks! However, besides the InstanceMaxRequests, the MaxInstances default has also been changed from 10 to 4. Is 4 better than 10?

]]> By: ruslany http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/comment-page-1/#comment-81 ruslany Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:25:29 +0000 http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/#comment-81 In our tests we saw that increasing the InstanceMaxRequests improved the performance of FastCGI with PHP slightly. However, if this setting is configured to a value bigger than 500 (PHP's default for process recycling), then it may conflict with PHP recycling behavior (as described http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/246/using-fastcgi-to-host-php-applications-on-iis-70/#PHP_Recycling_Behavior). Since the performance difference between InstanceMaxRequests set to 200 vs. 1000 was not significant, but the chances of getting server errors with default value set to 1000 were higher, it was decided to change the default to 200. However it was too late to change it for IIS 6, as the FastCGI extension was about to be shipped then. In our tests we saw that increasing the InstanceMaxRequests improved the performance of FastCGI with PHP slightly. However, if this setting is configured to a value bigger than 500 (PHP’s default for process recycling), then it may conflict with PHP recycling behavior (as described http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/246/using-fastcgi-to-host-php-applications-on-iis-70/#PHP_Recycling_Behavior). Since the performance difference between InstanceMaxRequests set to 200 vs. 1000 was not significant, but the chances of getting server errors with default value set to 1000 were higher, it was decided to change the default to 200. However it was too late to change it for IIS 6, as the FastCGI extension was about to be shipped then.

]]> By: Franklin Tse http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/comment-page-1/#comment-78 Franklin Tse Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:22:23 +0000 http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/#comment-78 Oops... I forgot to mention that the non-thread-safe installer on http://www.php.net/downloads.php can be used after PHP 5.2.7, which is currently in RC stage, is released. That's because the issue documented in http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=45275 has been fixed. The installer can install the php-cgi.exe (with Other CGI selected) and allow users to install PHP extensions without any manual modification. The RC of the installer can be found on http://windows.php.net/qa/ Oops… I forgot to mention that the non-thread-safe installer on http://www.php.net/downloads.php can be used after PHP 5.2.7, which is currently in RC stage, is released. That’s because the issue documented in http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=45275 has been fixed.

The installer can install the php-cgi.exe (with Other CGI selected) and allow users to install PHP extensions without any manual modification.

The RC of the installer can be found on http://windows.php.net/qa/

]]> By: Franklin Tse http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/comment-page-1/#comment-77 Franklin Tse Sat, 01 Nov 2008 03:09:41 +0000 http://ruslany.net/2008/10/major-revision-of-fastcgiphp-article-on-iisnet/#comment-77 Hello, I noticed that the default parameter values of the IIS 7.0 FastCGI Module is different from those in the FastCGI Extension for IIS 6.0. Is there any reason for that? (Also posted at http://forums.iis.net/t/1152607.aspx) Hello,

I noticed that the default parameter values of the IIS 7.0 FastCGI Module is different from those in the FastCGI Extension for IIS 6.0. Is there any reason for that?

(Also posted at http://forums.iis.net/t/1152607.aspx)

]]>