[Bese-devel] Re: hunchentoot backend?

[Marco Baringer]

Jan Rychter <jan at rychter.com> writes:

> I currently have some setups with UCW using the plain httpd backend
> behind lighttpd -- that works, but I have doubts about its scalability
> and the features are very limited. I'd much rather replace it with
> hunchentoot behind lighttpd.

yes, i've thought of the same thing. i'd like to be able to drop the
httpd backend and replace it with hunchentoot, but i want to make sure
that it works as well as the httpd on openmcl and sbcl first. in
particular i want to make sure hunchentoot, like the httpd, provides
the option on not keeping the entire request/response in memory. if it
does we lose the ability to handle large files (this, and stream
encoding issues, was one of the reasons i wrote the httpd backend in
the first place).

-- 
-Marco
Ring the bells that still can ring.
Forget your perfect offering.
There is a crack in everything.
That's how the light gets in.
	-Leonard Cohen