Going to the following url: /res/xyz.gif properly gets rewritten to
/code/script.CustomResource.php?File=xyz.gif and the php processor
properly handles the php file.
But going to this url: /Blocked properly gets rewritten to
/code/Scripts/Blocked.php but the php processer never handles the php
file, nginx returns the .php source code.
you’d need to nest the fastcgi location too inside of that block, if
it -has- to be in a location {} - but i don’t think you need those
location original blocks at all.
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 12:35:23PM -0500, Clint P. wrote:
location /res {
}
}
Going to the following url: /res/xyz.gif properly gets rewritten to
/code/script.CustomResource.php?File=xyz.gif and the php processor
properly handles the php file.
But going to this url: /Blocked properly gets rewritten to
/code/Scripts/Blocked.php but the php processer never handles the php
file, nginx returns the .php source code.
you'd need to nest the fastcgi location too inside of that block, if
it -has- to be in a location {} - but i don't think you need those
location original blocks at all.
What is the difference between these two blocks in practice? I can
imagine less regular expressions to handle, and this will cause and
increase in the performance on sites with a large amount of traffic. Is
this true, or is just best practices for nginx?
you’d need to nest the fastcgi location too inside of that block, if
it -has- to be in a location {} - but i don’t think you need those
location original blocks at all.
What is the difference between these two blocks in practice? I can
imagine less regular expressions to handle, and this will cause and
increase in the performance on sites with a large amount of traffic. Is
this true, or is just best practices for nginx?
Yes, this is perfomance issue and therefore this is best practice.
This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.