In all seriousness, it's simple enough to run up Apache with the workload you think you want (even if the filenames are nonsense and the file contents all identical). So do that. Then you can do your capacity planning with numbers rather than assumptions.
The point of a CMS isn't to quickly serve files. It's to easily administer content. Everyone runs a cache in front of their CMS, and the CMSs themselves are designed to work that way. There isn't much difference in serving speed between the cache and Apache. Having said that, it's amazing how many these "small percentages" whittle away performance. We serve about 8TB a day from one machine running Apache simply because we don't run any fanciness. But you're not really in that class of content serving, so I'd serious think about the efficiency-to-you of a CMS with a serving cache. -glen -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
