httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jeffrey A. Stuart" <jstuart-apa...@neo.rr.com>
Subject RE: Apache 2.0 final ?
Date Wed, 13 Jun 2001 15:55:49 GMT
Ok, I've emailed this a couple of times and I'm gonna say it once again. :)
We NEED Apache 2.0 out ASAP.  We needed Apache 2.0 out in January.  We needed
a beta back last year at the end of September or October whenever the UK
ApacheCon was.  I can't stress this enough.  Apache is starting to fall behind
technologically.  I have a friend of mine who had to switch from Apache to
Zeus cause Apache couldn't handle the load.  He was only able to get a max
throughput of 12 Mb/s out of Apache and he PERSONALLY was able to get 40 Mb/s
out of Zeus.  AND he told me that he's heard of people doing 80 Mb/s through
Zeus.

We NEED Apache 2.0. :)  I think the multi proc/multi threaded model will
really give some oomph to the server.  Combine that soon with mod_perl 2.0 and
some other technologies out there and we can compete with Zeus and some of the
other web servers in high load applications.

--
Jeff Stuart
jstuart@neo.rr.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Stoddard [mailto:bill@wstoddard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 12:52 AM
To: new-httpd@apache.org; William A. Rowe, Jr.
Subject: Re: Apache 2.0 final ?


> From: "Brian Behlendorf" <brian@collab.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 10:01 PM
>
>
> > On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > > Trick question, let me explain...
> >
> > I think people like him are asking: when is the fiddling done, and people
> > have a program they can start to incorporate into their operating system
> > releases, deploy for production customers, etc?  While we're still working
> > on low-level issues like pools/sms in APR and fixing other big performance
> > issues, we're not there yet.
>
> Agreed, but let's not be too obsessed about performance vs. architecture.
> If the architecture is right, optimization becomes trivial in 2.0.21, .22,
etc,
> so sms-enhanced pools are a precursor to a release.  Full implementation of
> twelve alternate memory allocation structures is not...

a precursor to a release? Or not trivial? I hope it is not necessary to fully
implement
twelve alternate memory blah blah before a release :-)

>
> I see very few showstoppers remaining to a general 'find the bugs' beta
release
> in the course of the next two weeks.  Resolving the query-scoreboard and
getting
> the lifetimes straightened out first is key (and sms helps with alternate
> lifetimes.)  But I don't see any more "Big Things" to hold up 2.0.  We are
close
> enough to taste it.

Yep.

>
> To have mod_ssl/tls all wrapped up for the general release would be
fantastic,
> of course, but it would be nice to know Apache 2.0 sans ssl is as solid and
> far superior to Apache 1.3 even before that's introduced.

We definitely should not wait for SSL.

>
> If it means that we end up with a stable release in July, without the
mod_ssl,
> that's fine by me.

Roger that.

> If the next stable 2.0 incarnation rolls in mod_ssl, I think
> everyone could live with that.  If proxy reaches stability when Apache does,
then
> great, call them both stable.  Otherwise, we have Apache 2.0 stable,
including
> proxy beta candidate.  The parts ought to grow and stabilize on their own.
>
> The async and layered I/O ideas are great, and both would take some time (6
mos?)
> to evolve.  But somewhere along the line we have to decide 'that's 2.1.'

Sounds good to me. I agree that this should not hold up 2.0 (though I am a fan
of
eventually getting both into the 2.* line).

>
> > I think it's enough to state "as soon as the showstoppers are out of
> > the httpd-2.0/STATUS file" as a qualifier for that.  Hopefully it means
> > folks are focusing on those issues.
>
> One hopes :-)  Can't forget though that it's one's own itches.  Apache tries
to prove
> that many coders, pulling the oars to their own sense of rhythm, create
something
> worthwhile.  Some days the oars get tangled, but I think we succeed
neverless.

Heh... I recall telling Ryan on this list, around 8 months ago that
introducing filters
into Apache 2.0 would delay us 6 months. And Ryan said no way would filters
delay us 6
months, it would only be on the order of weeks.  Heh, heh... Still
counting...Filters are
way cool and scratch a big itch but there is a lesson here. :-/  If you want
to see Bill
go completely ape-shit, just propose that another big chunk-o-code like
filters go into
Apache 2.0 before it is released :-)

Bill



Mime
View raw message