Stipe Tolj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in gmane.os.cygwin on Wed, 30 Jul 2003 00:51:18 +0200:
Andrew DeFaria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > This is good to hear. Perhaps I will switch from Apache for Windows -> > > Apache under Cygwin. Only problem is I also trying to move my web site > > over to a Linux box instead - which makes this all kinda moot. However I > > do have a friend who wishes to host his web site on a Windows box and I > > am contemplating using Cygwin for most services. If Apache under Cygwin > > works well with 1.5.0 then perhaps I'll just go that way. I wonder if > > anybody has measured the speed difference between Apache for Windows and > > Apache under Cygwin... > I did some time ago. It was almost 35-40% slower on Apache for Cygwin > then his native (win32) counterpart. > Plain html file requests, no php or any other "magic". Andrew might want to consider compiling Cygwin-Apache with the native Winsock option. This way it still lives in the Cygwin file system space so has the POSIX/Linux style configuration files but bypasses the Cygwin Berkeley->Winsock socket API translation. Apparently this helps. (But I suspect the majority of the performance difference Stipe has found is the use of threads in the native Windows version against forking child processes in the *X versions which is a more expensive operation.) Regards -- Sam Edge -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
