httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sco...@taliesin.cs.ucla.edu (Scott Michel)
Subject Re: BSDi vs. NT
Date Mon, 19 Aug 1996 03:44:07 GMT
Randy Terbush says:
> What can you do with IIS that you can't with Apache?
> 
> What could the IIS server be doing in this example that would make it
> appear so much slower?
> 
> Are you suggesting that Apache on an NT machine would outperform Apache 
> on BSDI?

My point exactly.

The comparison isn't exactly fair. For example, NT doesn't exactly
support "#!" in scripts. So there's a little hacking one has to do
to figure out just what kind of script has to be run. One way is to
use the file extension assoc table to do this, and cache the result.

[Warning: This is a SWAG]

It could be that MS isn't doing this and doing the assoc lookup each
time - which'd explain why the CGI performance is slower.

[Retract warning]

Nonetheless, yes, you'd have to have an Apache on NT to compare an Apache
on BSDi. Clever marketing on BSDi's part, and catches the unwary completely.
Like my boss, who was just about to ditch Sun, Solaris, NT until I did a
little analysis. Qualitatively and quantitatively, the Web pages we serve
to the USAF and DLA are faster using NT and Netscape's Enterprise server
than Solaris and the Enterprise server.


-scottm

Mime
View raw message