Slashdot Mirror
IIS 7.0 Learns a Few Tricks from Apache
An anonymous reader writes "According to BetaNews, Microsoft is learning a few tricks from Apache for the next release of IIS, version 7.0. Specifically, the IIS feature set has been broken down into modules to reduce overhead. Modules can be changed on the fly, without restarting the Web server. Also, the IIS metabase has been completely dropped in favor of easily editable XML configuration files. Each Web application can have its own config file that overrides the system-wide configuration."
Specifically, the IIS feature set has been broken down into modules to reduce overhead. Modules can be changed on the fly, without restarting the Web server.
I am shocked that it has taken this long to implement these features. Come on now. The rest of the industry has known that this increases stability, eases management and reduced computational overhead for years. Why is it do they think that an eight year old Linux box running Apache can serve up such huge volume versus a latest and greatest IIS server? Also, "simple configuration. IIS 7.0 does away with complicated the "Metabase" and replaces it with XML configuration files, Well, yeah! The fact that they are even talking about doing this rather than simply implementing the feature and then talking about it troubles me though. For myself, I am not running anything sophisticated for the sites I manage but I want simplicity of management and therefore went with standard OSX hosting systems. For heavier lifting, an OS X server system for our scientific databases is not quite as fast as Linux based solutions for some data types, but it is certainly easier to manage than Linux or IIS. If Microsoft wants me to switch, they had better come out with something truly special rather than simply aping the rest of the industry.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Can you install two different versions of IIS and have them run on different ports and/or addresses? Install or uninstall without rebooting? Change or inspect the source code?
Everybody's a libertarian 'till their neighbour's becomes a crack house.
Is M$ becoming a mass copy store...First Firefox (for IE7.0) then Apple OS X (for Vista) and now Apache (for IIS). Are they going out of business of innovation?
I was thinking the exact opposite. I like editting a plain ol' text file by hand. Editting XML is a pain; yeah it's all text but then so is Postscript.
Trolling is a art,
IIS 6.0 utilized an editable-during-runtime xml configuration file, metabase.xml. The new stuff is more integrated into a .Net Framework style config.
Editing the httpd.conf file is a real pain.
Heh, I worked with someone who thought it was a pain to edit too. His solution - he erased every single comment from httpd.conf. (He thought it was a pain because it was too long. Needless to say, tempers flared.)
wow, I guess that most slashdotters REALLY hate MS enough to not even know the characteristics of their current offerings...
so if IIS is just copying Apache... then remind me why should I choose IIS over Apache?
Because it costs les... I mean, because the OS it runs on is more secu... Oops, I really meant, because people should support all the good things that MS do for the...
Sod it... Hey, O'Gara, you get paid good money to come up with this horse-shit - take it away, would you?
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
I tend to agree... sort of. Once your familiar with httpd.conf, editing it tends to be quite simple. However, trying to write an application front end to do that is a pain. This is where XML is nice. Its structured and formatted. The idea behind using XML isn't to make your life easier to edit it by hand... its to make it easier to make automated tools to edit and query the config files.
Okay...So I guess the OP fixated on one thing (modular configuration snippets) and wrote off all IIS efforts as copying.
It is this complacent attitude that will get Apache's ass handed to it.
When I last checked, Apache has no way (short of parsing the config file with your own crappy scripts using unreliable regexen ) for you to inspect the current configuration. IIS has this, the entire object model of the server configuration is available for inspection from the scripts, guaranteed to be accurate.
Apache needs to provide (if not a more structured file format), a set of script-callable APIs for configuring and managing the server.
Grepping the config file and making one or two changes then restarting may be sufficient when you're running 10 or 20 sites in production, but when you're hosting 1000s, you need something better.
IIS is also completely manageable from scripts, and I cast envious glances at the things our IIS admins are able to do with scripts. Create new vhost: Check. Temporarily disable vhost: Check. Modify vhost properties at runtime without bouncing the entire server: Check.
Apache doesn't have anything equivalent (unless you count the big-hammer apachectl START/STOP/GRACEFUL) as "management". Or you write your own. (Yeah, we all have time to reinvent that wheel.)
Apache is playing catch up here in every sense.
And this comes from someone who runs tonnes of sites under Apache in production.
Believe me, generating Apache configuration from a canonical source (i.e. a database) is a royal pain in the ass, but currently the only way you're really going to manage 1000s of sites with Apache if you're offering hosting services.
This management is the single biggest thing missing in Apache today.