NYCPHP Meetup

[David Krings]

leam wrote:
> Not a question of "can you make it more performant?" as that's easy to
> answer. I'm looking at "Is there a web metric that makes it more viable
> for a small start up to spend time maintaining non-mainstream software
> collections than using standard tools like Apache, Linux, and
> traditional servers"?

Do you even need these improvements? If your current setup works out, why 
bother optimizing it and potentially hitting a bunch of problems? Improving 
performance is always appreciated, but finding metrics, evaluating them, then 
tweaking them, then trying different constellations. I don't know, but that 
effort and risk for a theoretical performance increase?

Some long time ago I read in one of the more populer computer magazines (Micht 
have been Computerworld) a performance analysis of IIS on Windows (obviously), 
Apache on Windows, and Apache on Linux. Their results showed that Apache on 
Windows performs best. Their recommendation was to use the WAMPP stack for web 
development. I don't know how accurate their test was and how the situation is 
today, but it shows that there are more factors to performance than just the 
web server application. Sure, some light weight web server apps can surely 
perform better, but there are likely things that these apps can't do. And 
other characteristics such as reliability are almost more important than kick 
ass performance.

David