> Well apache isn't quite lightweight. I was hoping to find something > small, that eats as few recources as possible. I don't need cgi > support, perl and other stuff like that. Only html+php. > It's not like i don't like apache. I just think it's not suited for my > kind of application. > If you still think i should use apache please tell me, because right > now i don't know what to think.
I'll tell you what I think, FWIW. Apache may not exactly be lightweight by your definition, but it has always performed extremely well with minimal resources. I ran it for years on a 486 DX4 (100Mhz) with 64MB RAM serving 4 Web Sites with light to medium traffic. No problems. PHP will probably be your biggest resource concern, not apache. Besides, apache will support just about everything you'll ever want to do, so I would recommend starting with it because you'll likely end up using it in the end anyway. As for its performance, apache is lightweight enough for me, and I'm sure it will be for you. Apache configuration may be a little heavy for a first time user, but once you get the hang of it it's pretty easy. Good luck, Paul A. Scott mailto:pscott@;skycoast.us http://skycoast.us/pscott/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
