You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Brian Behlendorf <br...@hyperreal.org> on 1998/10/21 06:02:26 UTC
Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:27:05 +0200
From: Magnus Bodin <ma...@lists.bodin.org>
To: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Subject: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab
I hate to curse, but it's good to know the enemy ;-)
http://www.microsoft.com/workshop/server/migrlab/howto.asp
/magnus
http://x42.com/active/ip32.mpl
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by Rob Hartill <ro...@imdb.com>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> I hate to curse, but it's good to know the enemy ;-)
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/workshop/server/migrlab/howto.asp
The instructions are incomplete.
Step 1. perform self-lobotomy.
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by Michael Anderson <mk...@redes.int.com.mx>.
David Sklar wrote:
> I'd be interested in helping out with such a document.
Great, I'm in the research stage now looking at advocacy
sites and pages, and looking what people have to say about
Apache/Linux and IIS/NT. I'll email or post the URLs I find,
just as a starting point. Keep track of URLs and documents
you find and we'll compare notes shortly.
Any pointers or suggestions by anyone is appreciated.
Thanks,
--
Mike Anderson
Freelance Consultant
http://www.commproc.com
mka@redes.int.com.mx
+52 473 24837 voice/fax
+52 473 25789 voice
Guanajuato, GTO, Mexico
"If it looks like a bug, waddles like a bug,
and quacks like a bug, its a quack!"
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by David Sklar <sk...@student.net>.
Mike -- I'd be interested in helping out with such a document. I run
apache on various linux boxes for www.student.com and www.tvgrid.com and
friends. We used to use NT way way way back in the day (i.e. 1995) so I
don't think my "migration" knowledge (basically toss it out and start
over) will be very useful, but I could definitely help out with some
configuration stuff and analysis of different dynamic page delivery
systems (PHP, mod_perl, CGI, etc.)
-dave
Michael Anderson wrote:
>
> There are several advocacy sites for Linux around, probably
> others for other unices, and probably also for Apache, though
> I'm not currently aware of it. I'm going to look around at whats
> available.
>
> What I have in mind is a highly-structured credible-looking
> document along the lines of the MS document, with detail
> technical info. as well as general guidelines and case
> studies.
>
> If you're interested, do the same research, and we'll make
> contact in a few days. We may be reinventing the wheel ...
>
> There's probably a better mailing list for this discussion -
> suggestions?
>
> Ed Korthof wrote:
>
> > I'd love to write up some copy providing business reasons for switching
> > from IIS to Apache on Unix -- not that it's a hard topic to cover. ;)
>
> Regards,
> --
> Mike Anderson
> Freelance Consultant
> http://www.commproc.com
> mka@redes.int.com.mx
> +52 473 24837 voice/fax
> +52 473 25789 voice
> Guanajuato, GTO, Mexico
>
> "If it looks like a bug, waddles like a bug,
> and quacks like a bug, its a quack!"
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by Michael Anderson <mk...@redes.int.com.mx>.
There are several advocacy sites for Linux around, probably
others for other unices, and probably also for Apache, though
I'm not currently aware of it. I'm going to look around at whats
available.
What I have in mind is a highly-structured credible-looking
document along the lines of the MS document, with detail
technical info. as well as general guidelines and case
studies.
If you're interested, do the same research, and we'll make
contact in a few days. We may be reinventing the wheel ...
There's probably a better mailing list for this discussion -
suggestions?
Ed Korthof wrote:
> I'd love to write up some copy providing business reasons for switching
> from IIS to Apache on Unix -- not that it's a hard topic to cover. ;)
Regards,
--
Mike Anderson
Freelance Consultant
http://www.commproc.com
mka@redes.int.com.mx
+52 473 24837 voice/fax
+52 473 25789 voice
Guanajuato, GTO, Mexico
"If it looks like a bug, waddles like a bug,
and quacks like a bug, its a quack!"
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by Ed Korthof <ed...@bitmechanic.com>.
I'd love to write up some copy providing business reasons for switching
from IIS to Apache on Unix -- not that it's a hard topic to cover. ;)
I found the "sample text" they provide (for mission statements) both
disturbing and amusing. It's disturbing because it is such a blatant
attempt to provide M$ followers w/ boilerplate text to try to justify the
costs of moving to NT. It's amusing because the only reasons I've seen
used -- in practice -- for switching to NT as a webserving platform amount
to this: "because our client|management demanded it (over our
objections)".
Ed, who found the piece on single IP which Marc posted a refrence to
("MS trashes itself") wildly amusing
On Wed, 21 Oct 1998, Michael Anderson wrote:
> Brian Behlendorf wrote:
>
> > I hate to curse, but it's good to know the enemy ;-)
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/workshop/server/migrlab/howto.asp
>
> Has anyone seen the flip side: A Migration Guide from IIS to Apache?
> I'd participate in writing such a doc if it doesn't exist.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Mike Anderson
> Freelance Consultant
> http://www.commproc.com
> mka@redes.int.com.mx
> +52 473 24837 voice/fax
> +52 473 25789 voice
> Guanajuato, GTO, Mexico
>
> "If it looks like a bug, waddles like a bug,
> and quacks like a bug, its a quack!"
>
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by Michael Anderson <mk...@redes.int.com.mx>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> I hate to curse, but it's good to know the enemy ;-)
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/workshop/server/migrlab/howto.asp
Has anyone seen the flip side: A Migration Guide from IIS to Apache?
I'd participate in writing such a doc if it doesn't exist.
Regards,
--
Mike Anderson
Freelance Consultant
http://www.commproc.com
mka@redes.int.com.mx
+52 473 24837 voice/fax
+52 473 25789 voice
Guanajuato, GTO, Mexico
"If it looks like a bug, waddles like a bug,
and quacks like a bug, its a quack!"
Sympathy for the devil.
Posted by Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>.
Ok, I'm going to get myself in trouble here. Sympathy for the devil
and all that. Worse yet i could be doing it in response to the
mindless column fodder they fed to IT "professionals."
Marc Slemko writes:
>
I'm not replying to Marc. I'm just using his comments
as a launching pad to make point to the group.
> CGI was created for a UNIX environment where processes ...
>
>Erm... so they are saying that NT can't deal with processes so they had
>to push threads.
They are saying: the unix process model and the W32 process
model are _way_ different. There just isn't a natural mapping
between them. Threads are the central player in WIN32. It's
a completely different mind set.
>Also interesting:
>
>The effect of this ... If your IIS application interacts
> ... (for instance, if it displays a message box),
>it will display that message box on a desktop that cannot be seen
>on the computer's monitor.
>
>So they are saying that IIS will display dialog boxes that
>no one can see.
This isn't really that different from saying that an Apache module
author that uses stdin/out/err maybe surprised that his I/O
disappears.
This warning is more important here because the presumption that W32
applications are built by pasting together a collection of third party
widgets each of which has N threads. These communicate via method
tables built on the fly as things are dynamicly linked in.
It can be very difficult to find widgets that never do screen I/O and
hence this warning. What it's saying, in the double speak of
marketing, is "you won't be able to use most of the widgets you
know and love because they probably assume a user is standing by
to talk to them."
These points are important for two reasons. First is it good
to understand what users want to do on W32. There really are
a lot of good widgets to be had here and you ignore that pool
of resources at your peril - presuming you want to play in
that market.
Second this model of assembling applications from widgets is just
better than the Unix model of processes and pipes. The unix
communities tedious attempts to get threads is just the tip of the
iceburg.
We are drifting in this direction anyway. What are modules but plug
in widgets? What is our module table but a dumb attempt to get
dynamic linking into method tables? How often have you wanted to have
a few threads in your module so you could have some cycles at times
other than when the client browser happens to notice you?
- ben hyde
"doubt in faith ... washed his hands, sealed his fate."
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by Tom Vaughan <tv...@aventail.com>.
> So they are saying that IIS will display dialog boxes that
> no one can see.
Does this mean that IIS then randomly selects between OK and Cancel, or
Delete?
-Tom
Tom Vaughan <tv...@aventail.com>
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>.
On Wed, 21 Oct 1998, Ben Laurie wrote:
> Brian Behlendorf wrote:
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:27:05 +0200
> > From: Magnus Bodin <ma...@lists.bodin.org>
> > To: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
> > Subject: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab
> >
> > I hate to curse, but it's good to know the enemy ;-)
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/workshop/server/migrlab/howto.asp
>
> Scary! That's an amazingly short list of Apache directives, and even so,
> they still have "no" under "Migrates" for most of them. So, we have huge
> document describing how to migrate that can only possibly work for
> totally trivial sites.
That is funny.
"TransferLog No IIS doesn ot use a transfer log."
"ServerName No The host name for your Web Server is stored in
your DNS server"
(well gee folks, Apache does thta just fine as well. Guess you haven't
heard of misconfigured DNS servers)
DirectoryIndex No IIS does not enable you to specify a pre-written
HTML document as a directory index
Server status reports No IIS 4.0 does not provider server status
reports
They even mislead you about what IIS does!
Wow:
CGI was created for a UNIX environment where processes are the
basic unit of operation and have less overhead than processes in
Windows NT Server. In Windows NT Server, where threads are the
basic unit of operation, processes have substantial overhead. Each
process receives a private physical memory allocation, is granted
space in the paged and non-paged memory pools, and is protected by
the Windows NT Server Security model. In fact, every attribute that
makes processes in Windows NT Server robust also makes them costly.
Because each CGI request generates a new process, CGI applications
have much higher overhead than ASP or ISAPI applications.
Erm... so they are saying that NT can't deal with processes so they had
to push threads.
Hmm:
Rather, the Windows Security Provider interface is used to provide
an encrypted challenge/response handshake mechanism that is
functionally unbreakable
"functionally unbreakable".
Also interesting:
The effect of this, to IIS applications, is that the IIS service
has its own desktop. If your IIS application interacts with a
desktop in any way (for instance, if it displays a message box),
it will display that message box on a desktop that cannot be seen
on the computer's monitor. Similarly, an IIS application will not
be able to send or post messages to an application on the interactive
desktop. If your IIS application needs to interact with the
interactive desktop, you should use another form of inter-process
communication such as named pipes.
So they are saying that IIS will display dialog boxes that
no one can see.
Re: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab (fwd)
Posted by Ben Laurie <be...@algroup.co.uk>.
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 12:27:05 +0200
> From: Magnus Bodin <ma...@lists.bodin.org>
> To: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
> Subject: Microsoft Windows NT Server Migration Lab
>
> I hate to curse, but it's good to know the enemy ;-)
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/workshop/server/migrlab/howto.asp
Scary! That's an amazingly short list of Apache directives, and even so,
they still have "no" under "Migrates" for most of them. So, we have huge
document describing how to migrate that can only possibly work for
totally trivial sites.
It reminds of the Monty Python sketch - the one where the Army defeat
all enemies by reading them the world's funniest joke :-)
Cheers,
Ben.
--
Ben Laurie |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686| Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant |Fax: +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org/
and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |
A.L. Digital Ltd, |Apache-SSL author http://www.apache-ssl.org/
London, England. |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache/
WE'RE RECRUITING! http://www.aldigital.co.uk/