PDA

View Full Version : question about proxies


raversworld
February 22nd, 2007, 16:05
Well the 2 most know obviously is phproxy and cgiproxy is there a difference between cpu usage? I was wondering because one of my friends is debating on the two.

Thanx in advance,
John
Secret
February 22nd, 2007, 17:45
i don't think there is a big difference between them.
raversworld
February 22nd, 2007, 18:27
well then why develope two?
brutetal
February 22nd, 2007, 19:17
PHPproxy is supposivly faster then CGIproxy.
jiehao85
March 4th, 2007, 07:42
Both are rather high, I would say.
Gipo_dinamia
March 5th, 2007, 07:14
PHPproxy is the highest one I'd say.
ingfina
March 5th, 2007, 14:02
PHPproxy is the highest one I'd say.
I agree. Both CPU and BW usage is higher on PhProxy. It is faster though.
jschurawlow
March 8th, 2007, 02:05
Considering the nature of proxy scripts (as they run entirely server side...) chances are if you could find something client side java based that interfaces with a java server side applet it'd probably help alot on CPU usage, as the server side system could simply spawn the proxy sockets, plus possibly provide a form of authentication as well.
traderonline
March 9th, 2007, 16:32
both are heavily Dependant on CPU and space :D
jiehao85
March 12th, 2007, 05:37
Like many of us mentioned already, I would recommend that you modify the codes if you want to ensure that the proxy does not eat up too much resources.
arihantjain
March 12th, 2007, 12:11
Both are high...
deny
March 17th, 2007, 11:49
php proxy use more resources than jmarshall cgi proxy. WHat you need is powerful server with at least 2GB memory.
apthost
March 17th, 2007, 12:58
There is a difference between the two, believe me.

We have clients running a php proxy and server load is next to nothing, however we still don't allow cgi proxies as they always cause some server load troubles.
Eclouds
March 17th, 2007, 17:46
I like Phproxy =D
jiehao85
March 24th, 2007, 22:32
PHProxy is heavier on bandwidth while CGIproxy is more heavy on CPU resources.
gryffin11
March 26th, 2007, 18:33
cgi proxy is well worth it though as it allows logging in to cookie based sites etc, you can see the difference if you look at the source

also php proxy said they will never make it as advanced as cgi proxy as they dont have the time/skill
john874
March 28th, 2007, 12:18
well then why develope two?

Isn't both of the proxies written in different programing languages. One written in CGI/Perl and the other in PHP.

I may be wrong, but that could be the reason for having both as some web hosts does not support php and then some may not support CGI/Perl.

I could be wrong though.
raversworld
March 28th, 2007, 12:40
Thanx on your input. I think that he will go with phproxy :) btw just one of my personal reasons why i don't like cgiproxy is b/c they don't encrypt the url when its being loaded. cgi proxy hase http/www/myspace/com and if you have a sonic wall that will stop it in a flash. however phproxy does the opposite.
raversworld
March 28th, 2007, 12:41
Isn't both of the proxies written in different programing languages. One written in CGI/Perl and the other in PHP.

I may be wrong, but that could be the reason for having both as some web hosts does not support php and then some may not support CGI/Perl.

I could be wrong though.

Thanx on your input. I think that he will go with phproxy btw just one of my personal reasons why i don't like cgiproxy is b/c they don't encrypt the url when its being loaded. cgi proxy hase http/www/myspace/com and if you have a sonic wall that will stop it in a flash. however phproxy does the opposite.