David, I am not "freaking out", but I do want to know if this comment applies to only the Apache 1.3.x series (and those before it). Do the same limitations apply to the Apache 2.0.x series? My impression was that you could choose to use the old process model, but you were not limited to it (under 2.0.x). I have read that you can choose different multiprocessing models, depending on the OS platform, and some may prove more "scalable". I think 1.3.x may be harder to "scale" upwards than some solutions, but for me it more than makes up for that in flexibility (which can also sometimes be a downside too, I know). But when you say "not scalable", I ask where the hard chalk line is drawn between the worlds of "scalable" and "not so". A nitpick, maybe, and it is simply your opinion, sure, but my opinion is that many folks find the old and crusty Apache 1.3.x multiprocess model "scalable enough". I know I do, but my needs have limits (but I think most do). My 2 cents. Troy >>> david at acz.org 10/29/03 10:18AM >>> Requiring a separate process per connection puts a fixed limit on the number of concurrent connections you can serve. A properly tuned box can usually handle many more than this. High traffic static sites, such as free hosts, are usually limited by bandwidth, operating system buffers or disk I/O. Apache's process model will cut off users well before these limits are reached. In addition, the extra load of having all those processes will have a noticable effect. _______________________________________________ TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list