Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 11:44:45 -0700 From: "'Alfred Perlstein'" <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Erin <Kahn@deadbbs.com> Cc: "'James E. Pace'" <jepace@pobox.com>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Scaling Apache? Message-ID: <20000828114444.Z1209@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <002a01c0111f$7b3b0de0$e815820a@sdccd.cc.ca.us>; from Kahn@deadbbs.com on Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 11:40:46AM -0700 References: <20000828113233.X1209@fw.wintelcom.net> <002a01c0111f$7b3b0de0$e815820a@sdccd.cc.ca.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Erin <Kahn@deadbbs.com> [000828 11:41] wrote: > > > > From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG > > > > * James E. Pace <jepace@pobox.com> [000828 11:23] wrote: > > > > > > I've got a 2 way Pentium III / 550MHz system with 1GB of > > memory running > > > 4.1-STABLE. > > > > > > For a project I'm working on, I need to have a webserver > > handle thousands > > > (and 10's of thousands) of simultaneous connections. To do > > this, it > > > seems the best way is to have lots and LOTS of apache's > > httpds running > > > at all times. > > > > [snip] > > > > apache is entirely useless for high amounts of traffic, you should be > > investigating another webserver or looking at a > > clustering/load-balancing > > solution. > > This almost scares me. If apache can not handle it, where do you go? IIS? Erm, can one say "out of the frying pan and into the fire?" > It might be time to start looking into apache 2, but it's still in alpha. > > I tend to agree with Alfred (no suprise there), you need to look into a > server farm with load-balancing. Or a decent performing web server. Zues, thttpd, roxen (there's others). -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000828114444.Z1209>