From: Brent W. <bre...@in...> - 2001-01-17 21:44:56
|
I don't know of any objective comparisons up on the web. I can say that: Apache will be faster, especially for static pages. But, TclHttpd is still quite zippy and should do, especially if what you plan is some sort of management interface. TclHttpd is super flexible, and designed to embedded. Apache is not designed for embedding in the same way - it wants to be in control. It has a heavy-weight process architecture, unless you want to wait for version 2 to come out of beta. Because Apache wants to dispatch each URL request to a different process, it can be awkward to use that architecture to control your application. You may need to invent some other communication channel, either shared memory or another socket, to get from your URL handler back to the application you are trying to manage. Both support SSL. Some folks have found that configuring Tcl and the TLS extension that provides SSL tricky, but it certainly can be made to work. There are folks on this list that can help. TclHttpd is used in various production envrionments, and so is Apache, of course. >>>"Ashwini Kumar" said: > Hello, > > I am responsible for the selection of an appropriate web server for our new > project. We are looking for an embeddable web server and two of the > strongest contenders are Apache and Tcl Web server. > > I have had some great past experiences with TCL and would like to > support Scriptics efforts. Therefore, could you please point me to some > links which would objectively compare Tcl web server with Apache. Your own > opinions would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > Ashwini Kumar > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > > _______________________________________________ > TclHttpd-users mailing list > Tcl...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tclhttpd-users -- Brent Welch <bre...@in...> http://www.interwoven.com |