Apache on Linux vs Windows

Tom plug at eastmond.org
Fri Nov 17 09:58:09 MST 2006

On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 11:06 -0700, Jesse Stay wrote:
> Apache was originally built for Unix machines, so I find this hard to
> believe.  Stock RHEL4 Apache rpms come with a ton of stuff built in
> that don't need to be running - I'd first check what modules are being
> loaded at startup.  It could be the stock Windows version has fewer
> things in memory and therefore can run faster - I'd compare Apache
> conf files of the two.  If you really want a performance increase,
> compile Apache from source and statically link all those modules into
> the Apache binary.

Thanks for all the insightful suggestions. We ended up taking the
approach Jesse suggested of comparing which modules were loaded on each
platform. There were quite a few more from the RHEL rpms than were on
the Windows server. After restricting the modules to just the ones we
needed on the Linux server our performance has been improved
significantly and now outperforms the Windows installation. I think
we'll considering using the APR from within Tomcat in the future - it
would be interesting to compare its performance with a standalone apache
or an alternate web server.

Thanks again for the tips!

More information about the PLUG mailing list