> require 'webrick'         # w/o fastcgi
> #require 'webrick/fcgi'a  # w/  fastcgi
> 
> Am I using fcgi correctly or is it just not having an affect 
> for these samples?

It's sadly a little more complicated than that.  The Webrick FCGI module
(I assume you're using the one from theinternetco.net) that I wrote is
one to be a FCGI server process, which means you need Apache or another
FCGI-enabled webserver to handle the requests:

Here's the fastcgi script that starts my app:

	require 'webrick/fcgi'
	require 'elf'
	 
	logger = Logger.new($stderr)
	$logger = logger
	 
	require 'db-connection'
	 
	fc = WEBrick::FCGIServer.new(:Logger => logger)
	fc.mount('/', WEBrick::HTTPServlet::FileHandler, File.dirname(__FILE__))
	fc.mount('/o', Elf::ClassLoaderServlet)
	fc.mount('/creditcards/batch', Elf::CreditCards::BatchServlet)
	fc.mount('/forms', Elf::FormServlet)
	fc.mount('/new', Elf::FactoryServlet)
	fc.start

And I save that as an executable .rbx script file, and I have apache set
to start any .rbx as a fastcgi process.

It shouldn't give you many perfomance boosts, since it actually runs
-more- code than webrick, but the advantage lies in integration with an
existing web system, and the automatic process start.

(I didn't want to manage starting webrick daemons at system boot, and I
have tens of scripts already, so having them all running at the same
time is unneccesary, since the loading is very uneven.)

Basically, webrick/fcgi is a replacement for HTTPServer, to speak FCGI
instead of HTTP.

I'm also planning a cleanup release that fixes some things, and after
that, I plan to make Instiki work as a fastcgi (which has issues due to
assumptions about / being the root of the app, so I'll have to do some
fancy URL rewriting), and making a third release after Instiki works.

Ari