Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apache 1.3.x vs. 2.0.x: The Debate Returns

Posted by timothy on from the or-continues dept.

darthcamaro writes "internetnews.com is running a story about the new Apache 2.0.49 release. They actually got a hold of a pair of Apache Software Foundation members and got them to speak out about the 1.3.x vs. 2.0.49 debate! Also Apache Director Sander Striker told internetnews.com that he expects the Apache 1.3.30 release cycle to begin this week... I still use 1.3.x because I've been using the Apache 1.x series 'forever' and I've never found a solid reason to change. Also, as pointed out in this article, the official PHP documentation clearly states, 'Do not use Apache 2.0 and PHP in a production environment neither on Unix nor on Windows.'"

9 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. I've been running PHP/Apache 2 for a while... by leviramsey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...and haven't noticed any problems. Why is this advised against?

    1. Re:I've been running PHP/Apache 2 for a while... by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It seems to be not the 'core' of PHP, but several of the modules that go with it aren't thread-safe.

      Apparently, this really only shows up in the real world under heavy usage, and using the prefork "multi-processing module" should reduce or eliminate the potential problems. I think.

      It SOUNDS like the warnings about not using PHP with Apache2 is mainly overcautiousness - every time one of these stories comes up, a few people pop up and say it's working fine for them, and I don't remember seeing anyone pop up and say "yeah, every time I get more than (x) connections at a time everything fails" or anything of the sort.

      I'm planning to try it out myself sometime soon...

      --
      Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
    2. Re:I've been running PHP/Apache 2 for a while... by JoScherl · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I known quite some cases where PHP/Apache2 won't really work together since Apache2 begins to segfault, but I was never able to reproduce it mysqlf, all I have are segfaults in the logfiles - and I can't run the whole Apache on my production system within gdb to see where the problem is. I've you ask the PHP guys for help for such a problem, they aren't very cooperative and tell that Apache 2 is not supported...

  2. Re:1.3.29 by trompete · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The one thing that is pushing me to upgrade is Subversion. According to Subversion's website, you need a 2.X binary to run the Apache plugin. This may be the first really big push for 2.X.

    --
    More than enough BS
  3. I run apache 2 and PHP in production by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I did this after figuring out that no one really knew why you shouldn't. I haven't had any problems. Occasionally someone cites that quote on the comp.lang.php newsgroup, but they never have any reasons to back it up. This is 3 machines, 5 websites between them, that see daily use of an extensive custom written CRM app that is all in PHP. MySQL is the database.

  4. The article also clearly states... by magnum3065 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ..."Bowen disagrees with the PHP documentation however, noting that actual users report that they are using PHP with Apache 2.0.x without problems."

    A while back on Windows I had some issues getting the PHP module to load in Apache 2.0 when I was trying to use the latest releases available for each. However, I believe it was in the beta days of PHP4 and I'm not a fan of PHP anyways, so that doesn't concern me.

    Now I use Apache 2.0 because that's what Subversion works with.

  5. Re:PHP link is for Canada Mirror by great_snoopy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I run apache 2.x with mod_php in production (apache,php and oracle database backend) for some time, and I can't see any problem by now.

  6. Modules! by davegaramond · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Basically, the upgrade inertia is largely due to modules. For me here's the list of modules that are currently 1.3.x only: * ChiliASP/mod_casp. I don't know whether they have supported Apache2 now, but frankly I intend to get rid of it of mod_mono (which already supports Apache2). I truly hate this piece of crap! * mod_frontpage. Also haven't checked out lately. * a couple of C modules I wrote. I really hate C though, and I intend to rewrite these in Ruby/mod_ruby.

  7. Apache2 Apache1 by man_ls · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I switched from using Apache 1.3.28 with PHP for my business (running on Windows) to using Apache 2.0.48.

    With *no other configuration changes*, web pages were rendered and sent out to the clients *literally 3-5 times faster* than they previously had been. A site that took 11 seconds to load and display on Apache 1 took 4 seconds with Apache 2.

    This was over a 100 mbit LAN connection; so the bottleneck was definately server-side, not client side.

    (the entire thing is reduced to 1 second now...btw)