I work for a university in Wisconsin. Currently I am working on building a new web server. We, like most of the world, don't need a very beefy server. My test server was a P133 w/64 megs of ram, a 10baseT network card on a 10baseT network. I used the same ZDBop tests that they did and Linux/Apache killed IIS 4.0. When IIS 4.0 got to @20 clients on my test bed, it choked out and leveled off. Meanwile Apache kept accelerating up to and beyond 80 clients. I've tested it with as many as 100 cleints (which is more than my server will ever see) and can't get the performance to level off on Apache. In other words, I personally don't see the need for a 512MB quad processor web server for the most of us. Because on my wimpy machine, on my isolated 10baseT network, I couldn't beat Apache/Linux no matter how hard I tried.
Slashdot Mirror
I work for a university in Wisconsin. Currently I am working on building a new web server. We, like most of the world, don't need a very beefy server. My test server was a P133 w/64 megs of ram, a 10baseT network card on a 10baseT network. I used the same ZDBop tests that they did and Linux/Apache killed IIS 4.0. When IIS 4.0 got to @20 clients on my test bed, it choked out and leveled off. Meanwile Apache kept accelerating up to and beyond 80 clients. I've tested it with as many as 100 cleints (which is more than my server will ever see) and can't get the performance to level off on Apache. In other words, I personally don't see the need for a 512MB quad processor web server for the most of us. Because on my wimpy machine, on my isolated 10baseT network, I couldn't beat Apache/Linux no matter how hard I tried.