Apache 1.3 vs Apache 2.0

DhoTjai

Verified User
Joined
Apr 23, 2006
Messages
80
Location
Netherlands
I wonder wich one is better.

Is it worth upgrading to 2.0?

What are your opinions about them? Performance/security etc
 
X-Hosted said:
As far as i can tell you, apache 2 has been a real pain for me.

Log limits, just goes down without an reason and needs to be restarted.:eek: my advise: stay with good old 1.3.x , wich i have done that too.

You need some tools to restart httpd when down every 1min.
work fine apache 2.2 in 5 server.
if you want tips about restart httpd reply here.



Wael
 
I upgraded to Apache 2.0.59 a couple days ago (along with PHP 5) because an app a client needed to run required it.

I can confirm that Apache 2.0 does need to be restarted fairly often for some reason. I think I will move to Apache 2.2 as I do not need FP extensions on the server and see how it does.
 
some modules in particular mod_security work better with apache 2 but if you dont have modules that need apache 2 and stability is essential I still find apache 1.3 to give the least problems. On servers I have seen using apache 2.2 their is a good performance boost.
 
I noticed apache 2.0xxx is faster then apache 1.3.37 (what a cool version!)

If I want to go back to 1337, will the httpd files stay 2.0 or convert to 1.3.37?
 
Looks like the results are controversial, one account says Apache 2.2.2 is about 24% faster at serving PHP files while another says its 27% slower.
 
Back
Top