[A83] Re: *.calc [OT]

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

[A83] Re: *.calc [OT]


I only presumed that your comment is inline with the thread of "why is
calc.org running apache?" I agree with you that apache in fact does not
perform as well as OSS advocates would like to proclaim. I'd be
interested to see an up to date benchmarking, but I can't seem to find
one. thttpd's benchmark is dated July 1998, so I can only assume it is
not accurate anymore.

My question is, what would you prefer calc.org use? I assume that they
are not running their own box, so apache is most likely sitting on an
uberbox. But, if they are running it on their own, then what would you
suggest they use, since the page is heavy on php (which makes the apache
point moot anyways)?

--
Scott Dial
scott@scottdial.com
AIM GeekMug : ICQ# 3608935

-----Original Message-----
From: assembly-83-bounce@lists.ticalc.org
[mailto:assembly-83-bounce@lists.ticalc.org] On Behalf Of David Phillips
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 8:01 AM
To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: [A83] Re: *.calc [OT]


My comment about Apache was not specific to calc.org.  However, there
are
many sites that do get several hundred or thousand hits (HTTP requests)
per
second.  Apache won't really scale past a few hundred and to do that can
require a hefty box (much more than would be required with a properly
designed server).

Your comment points out a common misconception about serving web pages.
For
most sites, a single user will generate multiple requests.  If a page
has
ten images on it, then a page request will generate eleven total HTTP
requests.  Do each of these requests require a heavy weight web server
process?

And as for needing to visit the real world, my comments stem from
working
with this stuff on a day to day basis.  It's one thing to implement a
simple
web server that has limited configurability and can only handle static
content.  Designing and implementing a full production capable server is
entirely different.  If your site only gets a few thousand page requests
a
day, then Apache will work fine.  Some of us aren't that lucky.

> If you are arguing that Apache's client handling can't handle 10000
> users (I assume so by the link), then you have to stop and think, how
> many individual users of calc.org is there? Now even if we all agreed
to
> hit it at the same time, we'd still never get 10000 users requesting
> data at the same time. I think you are just an idealist that needs to
> visit the real world(tm).
References: