Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 20:39:55 -0700 From: Don Wilde <dwilde1@ibm.net> To: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: *** Real Action Item: SPECweb Message-ID: <35415B0B.DB17BE59@ibm.net> References: <Pine.BSF.3.95.980424201652.28001V-100000@alive.znep.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marc Slemko wrote: > Again, Apache can give you a good performance but it won't likely break > any records for the handling of static content; if breaking such records > on FreeBSD is your aim, you must use Zeus or write your own to have any > chance. When Apache 2.0 comes out perhaps it will be up there, if all > goes well. Thank you, Marc. All right, I still like Apache for all previously stated reasons, but I'm willing to throw this open for general discussion. Anybody else got a feeling with logical reasons to back it? Remember, the goal of the exercise is to promote freeware, FreeBSD in particular. I still think the visibility of the Apache name is a plus, but am unsure as to how far we will have to go with hardware to overcome the deficit Marc assures me is there. Then again, is _either_ better than Netscape, Novonyx or IIS as a webserver? Marc, did you look at the web process tuning they did over the OOTB version? If these are RELEASE versions, they're going to be GP webservers, too. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?35415B0B.DB17BE59>