On Mon, 2003-01-20 at 10:23, Simon Batistoni wrote: > On 20/01/03 10:21 +0000, Alex McLintock wrote: > > A perl question..... > > > > I'm considering whether to build a web app on an NT4 box using perl and > > apache, or java and tomcat. The existing box is NT and although I'd > > normally recommend dropping in a new PC with linux on it no one on site has > > linux experience so I am slightly worried by the administration hassle. > > > > So folks, am I mad for considering NT+perl+apache? I know that apache on NT > > hasn't been great in the past.... > > It's okay, as long as you're not expecting a huge load. Apache on NT > still has serious scaling problems IME.
Yep. Apache on NT runs multi-threaded but mod_perl does not. All perl requests are serialised through one interpreter which can seriously hamper performance. > You might actually be better off considering running IIS, with > handlers set up to farm out perl processes to the perlis.dll handler > that comes with Activestate perl. I've generally found that > performance is better that way. But then, of course, you're running > IIS. Which, frankly, is hell. Alternatively run a light-weight apache on the front to serve static pages and proxy perl requests to a backend server, either another apache or IIS. There's lot's of info in the mod_perl guide. See http://perl.apache.org/docs/1.0/guide/scenario.html#One_Plain_and_One_mod_perl_enabled_Apache_Servers > You might find that you actually have less admin hassle dropping in a > linux box, and sshing into it yourself if anything ever needs fixing. Indeed. I've found that since the NT admins usually have zero experience in running production websites it might just as well be running linux. The lack of usable remote admin capabilities on NT makes maintenance a real headache. Simon.
