I'm not a PHP guy, so I can't be definitive about that, but the two big areas where Apache 2.0 seems to have been un-finished are PHP and mod_perl support. Random poking around on Google suggests anecdotally that this was true at least as recently as July, according to a random blog hit [afongen.com].
You're certainly welcome to try it -- bug testers are always welcome for any open source project -- but last I heard the conventional wisdom was still to avoid Apache2 for any site that needs stable mod_perl or PHP support. I understand that they both work, more or less, but people still seem to have problems with stability.
On the other hand, for other areas, Apache2 is supposed to be wonderful. I've heard reports of web server pool load tests that suggested that a tier of Apache2 servers could handle a load equivalent to something like 4 or 5 times as many Apache 1.3 servers. YMMV of course, but apparently there are real benefits to Apache2 for those that are in a position to take advantage of it.
As far as I know the problem isn't so much with Apache2 but with the changing API and modules because they haven't been rewritten/debugged to the specs of A2 to take advantage of it's architecture.
Apache 2: Improvements Are Obvious, But Upgrade Choices Aren't [earthweb.com]
PHP has been solidified for a few months with Apache 2.0.x. As far as mod_perl goes, they've been slow (6 months between releases) to even put out pre-releases. I can't say I blame them. There's been so much hype around the development of Perl 6 (more specifically, the Perl 6 runtime), that the mod_perl guys have to be wondering about their product's expected lifetime.
FWIW, I've used the mod_perl 1.99 dev code without any issue on a server that handles a significant load of authentication. While doin
mod_throttle and other non-core modules are normally only available to the 1.3.x series (for now).
Another reason is laziness: If the average admin can't find a package/port/... for an apache 2.x module in their favorite Linux distro or BSD ports collection, they'll normally go for 1.3.x, instead of porting the module to 2.x.
If a thing's worth doing, it is worth doing badly.
-- G.K. Chesterton
Big Changes ? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Apache Section's Motto: (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot's Apache Section: For The Apache Admin Who Just Refuses To Get On The Mailing List.
Why Not 2.0? (Score:2)
OK, I'll admit not being on the apache mailing list.
But I'm thinking of installing Apache (and gentoo ) on an unused Athlon box.
Is there any reason not to install the latest Apache 2.0 instead of the 1.3 series?
[I ask because, IIRC, early releases of 2.0 didn't support the latest PHP.]
Re:Why Not 2.0? (Score:2)
I'm not a PHP guy, so I can't be definitive about that, but the two big areas where Apache 2.0 seems to have been un-finished are PHP and mod_perl support. Random poking around on Google suggests anecdotally that this was true at least as recently as July, according to a random blog hit [afongen.com].
You're certainly welcome to try it -- bug testers are always welcome for any open source project -- but last I heard the conventional wisdom was still to avoid Apache2 for any site that needs stable mod_perl or PHP support. I understand that they both work, more or less, but people still seem to have problems with stability.
On the other hand, for other areas, Apache2 is supposed to be wonderful. I've heard reports of web server pool load tests that suggested that a tier of Apache2 servers could handle a load equivalent to something like 4 or 5 times as many Apache 1.3 servers. YMMV of course, but apparently there are real benefits to Apache2 for those that are in a position to take advantage of it.
Re:Why Not 2.0? (Score:1)
Re:Why Not 2.0? (Score:2)
No stability problems here, yet
Re:Why Not 2.0? (Score:1)
FWIW, I've used the mod_perl 1.99 dev code without any issue on a server that handles a significant load of authentication. While doin
Re:Why Not 2.0? (Score:1)
mod_throttle and other non-core modules are normally only available to the 1.3.x series (for now).
Another reason is laziness: If the average admin can't find a package/port/... for an apache 2.x module in their favorite Linux distro or BSD ports collection, they'll normally go for 1.3.x, instead of porting the module to 2.x.