On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Joey J <Joey@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Apache 2.4 has had a stable release out for over 2 years but is only used by > 2.5% of active Apache sites. Why is the adoption so low?? The Apache > foundation has been recommending upgrading to 2.4 for some time and looking > at the improvements I see significant value in several. I don't see any > reason why anybody wouldn't want to use it but the community seems to think > it's bad. > > What am I missing?? > > Current market share: > http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.4/all > > -Joey J It takes a *long* time for commercial people to move to new major versions of things. People have already mentioned that server releases have very conservative sets of packages, but you also have to take in to account the cost-benefit of an upgrade. If you are on the latest apache 2.2 branch, you are already using a pretty great httpd, and so there aren't that many benefits from upgrading, whilst there is a lot of cost - configs need to be updated and verified. Businesses need to prioritise what is upgraded and what can remain the same. In our case, we have an ambition to move from 2.2 to 2.4 on our reverse proxies, as currently we run two instances of apache, one using event and serving regular http, and one using worker and serving SSL. Apache 2.4's event MPM allows serving SSL, and so we can remove this complexity, and so - eventually - this will be a good upgrade for us. However, the system we currently have works perfectly well. It is hard to justify this upgrade, even though it would give us some maintenance benefits and performance increases (albeit, unneeded for us). I've performed the update on a number of personal boxes, for the way I use apache the changes were minimal. Cheers Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|