From: "Geo." 

"Rich"  wrote in message news:3ec7c573$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>   It is much more than that.  I haven't see direct comparisons but I
pretty sure it is faster than IIS 5.0 with the kernel mode cache that was
available.  It's more functional as the old cache was static content only.
If you look at the benchmarks you will see dynamic content performance has
increased.<<

I saw that in the graphs, I also know they separated the front end/back end
processes somehow which is supposed to improve performance in some
situations. They also changed the startup resource allocation which for a
machine hosting hundreds of sites can be significant.

Any idea if disk performance has been enhanced? I noted they used striping
for the benchmark so it's obvious they realized this was a bottleneck and
may have tried to tweak it. I found disk was my main bottleneck and on
machines with lots of spare cpu using disk compression could improve the
performance of the sites. Seems to me this should be even more pronounced
now due to the changed http.sys setup.

Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4