Re: What a machine for www?

Rex di Bona (rex@staff.cs.su.oz.au)
Mon, 25 Apr 1994 16:11:58 +1000

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Gunter: "Who can express URL syntax with BNF"
Previous message: Rob McCool: "Re: Bizarre lag problem quelled w/ httpd1.2"
Maybe in reply to: Guenther Fischer: "What a machine for www?"

> Date: Sun, 24 Apr 1994 16:55:16 +0200
> From: Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@cs.indiana.edu>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
> Subject: Re: What a machine for www?
> Organization: Computer Science Dept, Indiana University
>
> In article <6945@cernvm.cern.ch> you write:
> >Hi,
> >our www-machine has much traffic. Sometimes load is about 10. It is a
> >Sparc 10 with Solaris. It is also the ftp-Server.
> > [...deletia...]
> >We would take another machine, but what is the best for this mix.
> >More CPU-Power, more processors, more ... ?
>
> My offhand guess would be fewer execs. Forking should be dirt cheap
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> under Solaris (it does copy-on-write, doesn't it?) but CGI requires
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Nope. Under Solaris forking is an increadibly expensive operation.
if you can, do NOT fork (or vfork or anything like that). Solaris
will drive people back to monolithic programs.

Next message: Gunter: "Who can express URL syntax with BNF"
Previous message: Rob McCool: "Re: Bizarre lag problem quelled w/ httpd1.2"
Maybe in reply to: Guenther Fischer: "What a machine for www?"