Apache Site: www.apache.org
Release: 1.3.6 (Released 25th March 1999)
Apache 1.3.6 is the current stable release. Users of Apache
1.3.4 and earlier on Unix systems should upgrade to this
version. Read the Guide to
1.3.6 for information about changes between 1.3.4 and
1.3.6 and between 1.2 and 1.3.6.
These bugs have been found in 1.3.6 and will be fixed in the
Patches for bugs in Apache 1.3.6 will be made available in
the apply_to_1.3.6 subdirectory of the patches
directory on the Apache site. Some new features and other
unofficial patches are available in the 1.3
patches directory. For details of all previously reported
bugs, see the Apache bug
database and known
bugs pages. Many common configuration questions are
answered in the Apache FAQ.
The May Netcraft Server
Survery shows Apache now powers over 3,000,000 sites on
the Internet. Microsoft servers run 1,244,808 sites, and
Nescape 356,207. Apache was also the only major server to
increase its share of the server market, up by 1.03 to
57.22%. Microsoft was down 0.21 to 22.99% and Netscape down
0.20 to 6.58%. When servers based on Apache code are also
included, Apache has to total share of 60.79%.
The Apache and mod_perl reference cards at www.refcards.com have
been updated. The Apache card now covers Apache 1.3.6, and
the mod_perl card covers version 1.19. As usual, they are
available as single-page or multi-page formats, in PDF or PS,
and sized for printing onto A4 or US letter paper.
PC Magazine tested four secure servers in
Serve Your Site. The servers under test were Netscape
Enterprise Server, Sun's Web Server, Microsoft IIS and
Stronghold (an Apache derivative). The operating systems used
where Windows NT, Solaris and Linux.
In the introduction, the fact that Apache is used on 55% of
non-SSL sites is noted, but they add that this "overstates
its popularity" because it is a count of unique domain
names rather than unique servers. They note that in
Netcraft's server of SSL sites, "Microsoft's 37 percent is
almost twice that of Netscape's or Stronghold's share".
They ignored the fact that secure Apache (that is, Apache
plus mod_ssl or Apache-SSL) is now at 21%, and that if all
Apache derived secure servers are counted they have about the
same market share as IIS.
In the performance tests, the other servers easily beat
Stronghold for serving static pages. There was no drop-off as
the load increased (although interestingly there does appear
to be a noticable drop-off in IIS performance at high loads).
This is at odds with the results from MindCraft.
A more interesting test is the dynamic content one. Here they
tested using CGI under Stronghold against ISAPI and NSAPI
extensions to IIS and Netscape. Naturally the ISAPI and NSAPI
versions performed much better than using CGI. It is strange
that they did not test the various Apache methods of getting
high-performance dynamic content, such as PHP, mod_perl or
the Apache API (which is the direct equivalent of ISAPI and
NSAPI). PHP even comes as standard with Stronghold, so they
could easily have tested it in addition to the much slower
This bias is also apparent later in the article: "IIS and
Netscape both offer alternatives to CGI in NSAPI and ISAPI,
respectively--in-process API extensions that offer
performance benefits. To achieve the same results with
Apache, you must take your own native code programs and
compile them as modules into the Apache Web server itself, a
task that requires a lot more programming knowledge than
writing ISAPI and NSAPI scripts does.". This is of course
false: Apache offers many alternatives to CGI, ISAPI/NSAPI
are not scripting languages and do require compilation and
loading into the web server itself.
Apache/Stronghold actually did very well in the dynamic
content test. If the unfair comparison with ISAPI and NSAPI
extensions are ignored, Apache/Stronghold on Linux performed
as well as IIS, and like the other servers showed no drop-off
at high loads.