I’d like to see if we can collect in one thread as many CGI+IIS experiences here as possible.
I have been a bit disappointed with the lack of IIS dialog here. I’m guessing the typical developer here comes from a Mac or Linux world.
Reality is that the Windows world is alive and large. Many shops are Windows/IIS shops, including mine, and that’s not something that I would change.
If you are deploying your CGI Xojo web apps to IIS, can you weigh in here? There has been at least one implication that the web edition isn’t for Microsoft shops. It would be great if that wasn’t accurate. Dialog here can help tell the story. The quality of this thread will help me determine if I can continue my eval at this time or have to end it for now.
[quote=118306:@Frank Russ]I’d like to see if we can collect in one thread as many CGI+IIS experiences here as possible.
I have been a bit disappointed with the lack of IIS dialog here. I’m guessing the typical developer here comes from a Mac or Linux world.
Reality is that the Windows world is alive and large. Many shops are Windows/IIS shops, including mine, and that’s not something that I would change.
If you are deploying your CGI Xojo web apps to IIS, can you weigh in here? There has been at least one implication that the web edition isn’t for Microsoft shops. It would be great if that wasn’t accurate. Dialog here can help tell the story. The quality of this thread will help me determine if I can continue my eval at this time or have to end it for now.[/quote]
I’m sorry you’re having issues with IIS. Getting just the right Config with IIS is challenging., and the biggest hurdle we’ve had has been that the configs are so vastly different for each version of Windows server. That said, this is one of the reasons that we changed the base class of Web applications from a ConsoleApplication to a ServiceApplication. It gives you the ability to run a standalone web app as a service, and bypass IIS altogether.
As for CGI, the main issue is that you need to add A 32-bit variety of Perl to your server, and getting that to work with a 64-bit IIS can be a little tricky. When we did the original tutorials, we suggested the use of ActiveState Perl because it was the most compatible flavor we found. There is still configuration to be done to IIS beyond that, which is outlined in our documentation and noted by Paul in your other thread.
[quote=118313:@Michel Bujardet]Instead of creating a new thread, it would be more beneficial, if more courteous, to give a chance to your previous thread :
[quote=118317:@Greg O’Lone]I’m sorry you’re having issues with IIS. Getting just the right Config with IIS is challenging., and the biggest hurdle we’ve had has been that the configs are so vastly different for each version of Windows server. That said, this is one of the reasons that we changed the base class of Web applications from a ConsoleApplication to a ServiceApplication. It gives you the ability to run a standalone web app as a service, and bypass IIS altogether.
As for CGI, the main issue is that you need to add A 32-bit variety of Perl to your server, and getting that to work with a 64-bit IIS can be a little tricky. When we did the original tutorials, we suggested the use of ActiveState Perl because it was the most compatible flavor we found. There is still configuration to be done to IIS beyond that, which is outlined in our documentation and noted by Paul in your other thread.[/quote]
Very helpful. Thank you.
Note - I’m not having difficulty with IIS. At this point, I’m doing the diligence in advance to make a sound business decision on if this tool is right for us.
Your CGI IIS deployments that you mentioned: are the apps running completely reliably once you got them set up properly in IIS?
Can you cite number of simultaneous users? Thanks for your post. Much appreciated.
I have tried to get Xojo web apps running under IIS and CGI with Active Perl and have always given up as for me it is just way too much effort for very little gain. What I have done is followed Derk Jochems brilliant document RS_Xojo_WE_Stand_Alone_Windows_Server_Deployment.pdf which explains (with pictures) how to set up a Reverse Proxy using IIS and then you can have multiple instances of a Xojo standalone web app behind IIS. The real advantage is that you end up with your web app running in different instances so scales much better, you can make IIS handle the images, js and css stuff as well as SSL . All of these things are what IIS is good at and Xojo is not as good as IIS for this (not a complaint, just a fact that IIS is designed to do what it does and Xojo to do what it does) but by using this method you really do get the best of both worlds without the hassle of messing around with Perl and CGI.
In case anyone want the RS_Xojo_WE_Stand_Alone_Windows_Server_Deployment.pdf document then search the forum for Derk Jochems and send him an email, I am sure he will be happy to help and provide you with a download like. I have not included a link as I Derk normally asks people to contact him first.
I have to agree with Greg and Nathan in their points.
Currently, I have a project CRM tool I wrote with Xojo web that is hosted on Windows Server for the past 3 years in which I have run as a console and recently switched over to a service. Based upon user experience of the app, it is very responsive and the end users cannot tell how the tool is built.
If I decide to create more web apps, I would defiantly go with stand alone mode and as a service and avoid the headache of IIS or apache.