From: sameer <sameer@c2.net>
Message-Id: <199703011756.JAA26140@gabber.c2.net>
Subject: Re: ZD do it again!
To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 09:56:24 -0800 (PST)
Cc: new-httpd@hyperreal.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970227161330.10794C-100000@alive.znep.com> from
 Marc Slemko at "Feb 27, 97 04:45:44 pm"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com

> 
> Most of the tests are on Stronghold, so I'm not sure if they did contact
> them or not for performance tuning...
> 
	I remember a PC Magazine review for Stronghold. This was a
large number of months ago though, but they did have a seirous problem
with the ability to set the "Group". (The problem was that stronghold
defaulted to Gruop nobody but solaris only has 'nogroup' -- so sinc
ethen stronghold now checks for the existing of noboy or nogroup,
etc.) This was before we had a 300 page manual, before we had a cdrom,
a box, etc. They did contact us then, and I told them "make sure you
configure the maxspare/minspare" correctly. But they didn't ask me how
to do that. We haven't been contacted since that article though. There
is a new one, I take it from the posts here. I wonder if they are just
reusing their old stronghold test results, or if they are using the
old version of stornghold from back then.

-- 
Sameer Parekh					Voice:   510-986-8770
President					FAX:     510-986-8777
C2Net
http://www.c2.net/				sameer@c2.net