Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 28911 invoked by uid 6000); 20 Oct 1999 15:08:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 28902 invoked from network); 20 Oct 1999 15:08:22 -0000 Received: from ss07.nc.us.ibm.com (HELO 32.97.136.237) (32.97.136.237) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 20 Oct 1999 15:08:22 -0000 Received: from johngalt (unverified [9.37.75.6]) by johngalt.raleigh.ibm.com (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.83) with SMTP id ; Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:14:06 -0400 Message-ID: <037e01bf1b0d$c01eec00$064b2509@raleigh.ibm.com> From: "Bill Stoddard" To: Subject: Re: Apache 2.0 for Windows update Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 11:14:06 -0400 Organization: IBM Corp. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org > Some random comments: > I would expect Apache 2.0 to be even faster relative to Apache 1.3 as the > file size increases. sendfile API's really are most beneficial on large > files. Just for fun, I ran the simple ApacheBench test using file20k.html (20Kbyte file) and here are the results: Apache 1.3 - 244 cps Apache 2.0 w/o handle cacheing - 375 cps Apache 2.0 w/handle caching - 555 cps Bill