Both the suppositions are right! To have the proof-of-concept working in Apache, I do have it working 100% under Apache 1.3.23/mod_perl-1.26. I had performed benchmark studies under IIS/ASP, Tomcat/JSP and Apache/MOD_PERL and have seen the best performance under Apache 1.3.23/Mod_Perl!
However to convince my bosses, it would be lot nicer to impress upon them with Apache 2.0.35/mod_perl-2 as it seems Apache 2.0.35 is supposed to be the best in terms of performance. That greediness is what is pushing me to make it work under Apache2/mod_perl-2. Well, if things are in nascent phase I guess I should be content with what I have in Apache 1.3.23. Am wondering how AP-631/PPM/Apache2 users have not got into problems as I am seeing on W2K. Hoping for a possible fix soon! Thanks, Rex Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Perrin Harkins wrote: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > I am a newbie and had developed a proof-of-concept application on Apache >1.3.23/Mod_Perl-1.26-dev. We are researching into moving away from ASP/IIS >Webapplications to Apache/Mod_Perl. I am stuck with the latest Apache 2.0.35 with the >following problems. >> >> Do you really need to use Apache 2 and mod_perl 2? Why not use the >> proven 1.x series? It's still pretty early to be using the new stuff. > >If he's on Windows, he'd probably want to use Apache 2 for performance >reasons. > > >-dave > >/*================== >www.urth.org >we await the New Sun >==================*/ > > __________________________________________________________________ Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
