Pavan Balaji wrote:
No. I meant apache 2.0 was giving about 1.5 times better performance :-). Sorry about the confusion.
Thanks.
Btw, can you expand on the following ?
"Anyways, the proxy forwarding is still giving terrible performance (as compared to running it just as a webserver) -- about 2-2.5 times worse."
-sumeet
-- Pavan
======================================================= Pavan Balaji, | 774, Dreese Labs, 1584, Worthington St, | 2015, Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH43201 | Columbus, OH43210 (614) 327 0973 | (614) 292 8458 =======================================================
"Being happy doesn't mean that everything's perfect... It just means that you have decided to see Beyond the Imperfections" -- Rash
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Sumeet Singh wrote:
Pavan Balaji wrote:
We had tried this sometime back, and apache 2.0 was giving about 1.5 times the performance. But I didn't do any fine tuning stuff, so am not sure how reliable these numbers are. Anyways, the proxy forwarding is still giving terrible performance (as compared to running it just as a webserver) -- about 2-2.5 times worse.
Do you mean to say that when run as a proxy, apache 2.0 with worker-mpm does worse than apache 1.3 ? That's surprising, because none of the docs/articles that I have read have pointed out such a severe shortage in performance (p.s. I am not saying that your results were wrong).
-sumeet
-- Pavan
======================================================= Pavan Balaji, | 774, Dreese Labs, 1584, Worthington St, | 2015, Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH43201 | Columbus, OH43210 (614) 327 0973 | (614) 292 8458 =======================================================
"Being happy doesn't mean that everything's perfect... It just means that you have decided to see Beyond the Imperfections" -- Rash
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Sumeet Singh wrote:
Has anybody compared the performance apache 1.3.x running as a proxy server (using mod_proxy) against apache 2.0 (using worker-mpm) ?
-sumeet
