[lug] [OT] Apache 1.3 vs. 2.0 on Linux

[Ryan Wheaton]

I don't do work with Jakarta/Tomcat (yet), but we went with 1.3 because 
2.0's php support isn't quite ready for production (so i've read)..  
maybe it's PHP's support of 2.0...  I can't remember specifically, but 
when we put our PHP app on a 2.0 install it did weird things.  I 
learned apache starting with 2.0, and i've been really happy with my 
1.3 installs.

probably not much help, but figured i'd throw that in the ring.

-rtw
On Thursday, Apr 29, 2004, at 16:46 America/Denver, Dhruva B. Reddy 
wrote:

> My company is getting ready to migrate from IIS to Apache on RHEL 3.0.
> Our websites are written in Java, and run on Tomcat (with the web 
> server
> serving static content).
>
> I did some research a while ago which suggests that the main benefit of
> Apache 2.0 is its multithreadedness.  I am under the impression that 
> the
> overhead of forking processes in Linux is relatively low, and therefore
> 2.0 doesn't buy you much (especially considering the maturity and 
> module
> support of 1.3).
>
> I googled a bit for a debate on the two, but I couldn't really find
> anything specific to Linux.
>
> Has anyone heard anything/thought/discussed this?
>
> Thanks,
> -d
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> Join us on IRC: lug.boulder.co.us port=6667 channel=#colug
>