Greg Stein wrote:
> we have to take into account that some of those httpd's, like lighttpd, are
> replacing Apache plain and simple. [...]
[...] I'm just trying to say those
aren't necessarily*better* than Apache, but that they are
*better-suited* to their admin's scenarios.[...]
Last time I've heard about a large scale server thinking about switching
from Apache to lighttpd, the one problem that site wanted to solve was a
massive number slow clients simultaneously connected to the server, with
the http server mostly just serving as a pipe between the client and
php, and where the ideal solution had to consume as little resource per
client as possible.
Did the admin of that site just miss what the solution should have been
to handle this properly with Apache ?
