At 01:37 PM 10/31/2004, Yussef Alkhamrichi wrote: >I've tested this release on my server (W2K3, Apache 2.0.51, .NET Framework 1.1 >SP1), must say, +1 for this release, no strange things when testing 3 asp.net >websites (one of which uses .NET remoting to access the backend).
Excellent! >I have one question: can the installer also install a aspnet.default.conf in >the Apache folder? This would be handy for people who want this great >component up and running quickly. We should definitely consider this (along with your README.txt suggestion), shall we take this up in release 2.0.1? >I had to change the line: >"C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v$1.$2.$3/ASP.NETClientFiles/$5" >to >"C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework/v$1.$2.$3/ASP.NETClientFiles/$4" Changed in http://httpd.apache.org/cli/mod_aspdotnet.html. ><IfModule mod_aspnet.c> > Include conf/aspnet.default.conf ></IfModule> > >(I know that 'mod_aspnet.c' isn't correct, what should this be?) mod_aspdotnet.cpp (see the notes at httpd.apache.org/cli/mod_aspdotnet.html) You would not want to include a .default file, those should never be used live, only as templates. If the installer determined the root to :/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework, this could be even substituted in the aspdotnet.conf. >These ideas are only to get a nice release of httpd-cli that also non-dev >people as administrators can use easily :) Agreed we want to make adoption trivial. >Besides this 2.0 release: I'm very curious how far optimization could enhance >the performance of ASP.NET on Apache to match (or even beat?) IIS6. I'll have >look at this as soon as my schedule cleans up a bit :) (Maybe the use of >fibers? Or creating caching/pooling for certain objects like AppDomains, >WorkerRequests ?) Well, if you study the license of your IIS server, you will notice that licensing it precludes benchmarking it against other products :) Caching can be handled in part by using mod_cache, because such content should be grabbed from the cache, not mod_aspdotnet, when the results aren't volatile. As far as fibers etc, first the mpm_winnt would benefit from some restructuring and dynamic scaling. Feel free to also play in the module itself. Even an mpm_perchild could be useful for dispatching certain requests to a worker running the correct AspNetMount's. Lots of future possibilites, I'm significantly interesting in next assuring that a .NET 1.0 or 2.0 user can deploy the module, and that it will run under Apache 2.1-dev. Of course, all mod_aspdotnet patches are welcome for discussion at this list! Thanks for your testing and feedback. Bill
