Re: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
On Thursday, January 18, 2001, at 10:41 PM, jeremy brand wrote: Apache doesn't have threading (yet). If your business depends upon it, you may want to take a look at Solaris/Zeus if you are really getting heavy load high traffic. We serve millions of hits a day off of a small farm of FreeBSD servers running Apache+php for our dynamic content. Thttpd for our static pages (images, etc). thttpd is a GREAT server. I have a phpMyAdmin rpm including thttpd with php support, for easy MySQL administration of sql servers that don't want/need the weight of apache. Occasionally I see Alan Cox posting to the thttpd list as well, so it must have something ;) I've never used thttpd under heavy load, but everything I gather, it really does quite well, and it *is* faster than apache. What would be nice is if you could set up an apache alias to a full url (maybe you can- i've never tried- but I haven't heard of it either) in the httpd.conf file- as it would make image and static page serving from thttpd that much easier... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Michael A. Peters Abriasoft Senior Developer http://www.abriasoft.com/ (510) 623-9726x357 Fax: (510) 249-9125 -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
is there any benchmarks or proof that I should host a high traffic site on a FREEBSD/APACHE instead of a redhat Linux/Apache server? I have _heard_ that linux is great under medium load, but does not deal as well with super-high loads as well as freeBSD. that has not stopped me from using linux in all of my commercial installations, with not a problem once :) I think the answer is to say: we'll use apache, on (insert your fav. *nix here) - in a cluster of webservers that can be easily expanded as the need arises. I personally dislike sun: expensive, hyper-proprietary (almost worse then MS, because its their hardware as well), and really_really_rude What's great about both FreeBSD and Linux: commodity hardware! cheap! easy to get! cheap! It's easier to build in redundancy than it is to engineer 100% uptime. _alex -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: I think the single most importand piece of software that saves us the most money is thttpd. That all runs in a single thread and uses select to pump out content. Since it is a single thread, it never chews up tons of memory forking children. By the way, there is a PHP module for thttpd. -Rasmus Interesting. But (and I'm unsure of *exactly* what thttpd does) 2.4 also has a httpd built into the kernel, capable of rendering static content at "blistering" speed. So you could use Apache for dynamic, the kernel daemon for static. Without any benchmarks (or even a hardware profile!) I can't really add much more. But it's worth looking into. Incidentally, the must 2.4 gung ho distro seems to be SuSE, which I rate well above RedHat in terms of value, support and stability. -- ** Marx: "Why do Anarchists only drink herbal tea?" Proudhon: "Because all proper tea is theft." ** -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
On Fri, 19 Jan 2001 20:55:12 +, John Hinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Incidentally, the must 2.4 gung ho distro seems to be SuSE, which I rate well above RedHat in terms of value, support and stability. I like the way SuSE makes it easy to build and save a custom install config which can be later repeated. And the older text based YaST package selection tool is easy to use when I need to add a package I overlooked on the initial install. Egan -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
is there any benchmarks or proof that I should host a high traffic site on a FREEBSD/APACHE instead of a redhat Linux/Apache server? randy -Original Message- From: Ayan R. Kayal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 1:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PHP] RE: Ethics question... Before Microsoft bought it, Hotmail had a FreeBSD/Apache frontend and a Sun/Solaris backend. Supposedly, corporate wanted MS to move Hotmail to NT, but supposedly it failed so miserably at serving up 10 million users that they had to nix those plans. I think Hotmail is running FreeBSD/Apache for the most part, but 5-10% of the servers are Win2K... As for Linux, from what I've heard (haven't tested this out myself or anything), FreeBSD and Sun/Solaris are quite a bit more efficient for web servers. Linux just can't take the number of hits that the other two can. Linux is okay for development, but personally I'd rather run the same system on my development machines as I do for my live machines... O- ~ARK CFO, Hmedicine.com, Inc. I hope it feels so good to be right. There's nothing more exhilarating than pointing out the shortcomings of others, is there?... ~Randal from "Clerks" -Original Message- From: jeremy brand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: CC Zona Subject: Re: [PHP] Ethics question... Why would Microsoft be using Solaris, or Linux even? (hint, the same reason -- their stuff works less good). Www.microsoft.com used to be served off of Solaris (where else could you run a high performance installation of Oracle? ;). Hotmail was (is) FreeBSD. Anyone would be stupid to not be using linux in their interprise somewhere. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
I have come across numerous reports/tests comparing the various OS's in terms of raw speed and scalability. There are many conclusions but some things seem to stick out: 1.) Linux is very well supported and sometimes easier to maintain than the BSD's (RedHat RPM's etc.) 2.) Linux and FreeBSD are FREE! 3.) The BSD's (Free, Net, Open, BSDI) have the some of the best networking stacks and scale very well under heavy loads. 4.) Solaris scales very well under heavy loads and is rock solid but this comes at a great expense (hardware and OS). 5.) Linux is fast under light to medium-heavy loads but tends to slow down when saturated where as the BSD's and Solaris just keep on chugging. 6.) NT and 2000 are easy to deploy BUT are never as stable as any *NIX, cost money, and you are fored to do everything the MS "closed-source" way. 7.) NT/2000 uptimes will never compare to any *NIX OS. Everything is relative and is always changing with development you could spend many $10,000.00's on Sun/Solaris or you can run Linux or BSD and buy lots of inexpensive Intel/AMD/Alpha hardware. More hardware always wins as long as you have a reasonable OS. That's my two cents worth. ___ Scott A. Gerhardt P.Geo. Gerhardt Information Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Before Microsoft bought it, Hotmail had a FreeBSD/Apache frontend and a Sun/Solaris backend. Supposedly, corporate wanted MS to move Hotmail to NT, but supposedly it failed so miserably at serving up 10 million users that they had to nix those plans. I think Hotmail is running FreeBSD/Apache for the most part, but 5-10% of the servers are Win2K... As for Linux, from what I've heard (haven't tested this out myself or anything), FreeBSD and Sun/Solaris are quite a bit more efficient for web servers. Linux just can't take the number of hits that the other two can. Linux is okay for development, but personally I'd rather run the same system on my development machines as I do for my live machines... O- ~ARK CFO, Hmedicine.com, Inc. I hope it feels so good to be right. There's nothing more exhilarating than pointing out the shortcomings of others, is there?... ~Randal from "Clerks" -Original Message- From: jeremy brand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 10:22 AM To: CC Zona Subject: Re: [PHP] Ethics question... Why would Microsoft be using Solaris, or Linux even? (hint, the same reason -- their stuff works less good). Www.microsoft.com used to be served off of Solaris (where else could you run a high performance installation of Oracle? ;). Hotmail was (is) FreeBSD. Anyone would be stupid to not be using linux in their interprise somewhere. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
Apache doesn't have threading (yet). If your business depends upon it, you may want to take a look at Solaris/Zeus if you are really getting heavy load high traffic. We serve millions of hits a day off of a small farm of FreeBSD servers running Apache+php for our dynamic content. Thttpd for our static pages (images, etc). Our farm used to be linux, but FreeBSD has been better. Linux 2.2 would flake out under extreme load and not recover. FreeBSD gets stressed under extreme load as well, but it recovers. If you know redhat better and can't use Freebsd, that is fine. It might save _you_ more time to use redhat as the savings in administration could easlily be overturned if you don't know freebsd better than redhat. Don't get me wrong, on a personal note, I love linux (the most, I might add). I think the single most importand piece of software that saves us the most money is thttpd. That all runs in a single thread and uses select to pump out content. Since it is a single thread, it never chews up tons of memory forking children. I think our farm would need to be twice as big if we tried to use apache for our static content. I have nothing bad to say about apache, don't get me wrong. This is simply the way that works best for us. Our DB lives on a separate quad sparc and all of our content is centralized and remotely NFS mounted. Jeremy Jeremy Brand :: Sr. Software Engineer :: 408-245-9058 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.JeremyBrand.com/Jeremy/Brand/Jeremy_Brand.html for more - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "LINUX is obsolete" -- Andy Tanenbaum, January 29th, 1992 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - http://www.JEEP-FOR-SALE.com/ -- I need a buyer Get your own Free, Private email at http://www.smackdown.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
By the way, there is a PHP module for thttpd. Thank you. I know. I haven't had a chance to spend time testing it. Would anyone recommend it for mission critical environments? I can't really do that since I have never tried it. -Rasmus -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PHP] RE: Ethics question...
I can't really do that since I have never tried it. I plan on testing it under extreme load eventually. If I do before someone else does, I'll post my results. But for the mean time, our set up is working perfectly, so it may be a while. I'm a big thttpd advocate, so I'd (for no better reason) love to run thttpd+php instead of apache if it could provide = service under pressure. It most likely already does. I know thttpd by itself is the absolute best I have tested for high performance static content. It kicks apache up and down the block on this regard. Jeremy Jeremy Brand :: Sr. Software Engineer :: 408-245-9058 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.JeremyBrand.com/Jeremy/Brand/Jeremy_Brand.html for more - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "LINUX is obsolete" -- Andy Tanenbaum, January 29th, 1992 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - http://www.JEEP-FOR-SALE.com/ -- I need a buyer Get your own Free, Private email at http://www.smackdown.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
