There is usually a difference between "will (verb)" and "will be (verb-ing)". However, for this specific example, there is hardly any difference. Let's take a different example sentence that will make it more clear.
In an hour, we will watch a movie.
In an hour, we will be watching a movie.
1) means "In an hour, we are going to start watching a movie."
2) means "When we start our movie is irrelevant, but in an hour we will be watching some part of the movie."
So with sentence 2, in an hour we might be at the start of the movie, we might be at the end, and we might be somewhere in the middle. But we will still be watching.
This is mostly irrelevant to your sentence because there is practically no difference between "we will start joining you" and "we will be in the middle of joining you". Because joining a group doesn't take over an hour like a movie does.
Both sentences sound fine and mean the same thing. Sentence 1 sounds more natural and more casual to me. Sentence 2 sounds a little bit more formal.
This is an extract from a quite technical document. In addition to the problem of understanding the English constructs, you have second challenge in that certain terms have specialised technical meanings. Here we see process being used in a very particular way, as well as processing being used in a subtly different but related way.
In understanding this passage you need to identify the technical terms and establish their meaning in this particular document. You cannot do this simply by reading this one paragraph. We would hope that there would be a glossary for this particular document that would define the terms, however there may well not be one, so instead we at least need to look at a technical dictionary (for example), we cannot simply appeal to standard English usage.
So here you need to know what process, web server, request, concurrent and processing mean.
From my own knowledge of this field the Web Server is a particular process running on a computer, there will be many such processes running. The Web Server has responsibility to receive requests (typically from a Browser) and performs processing to satisfy those requests.
Here we come to the meaning of on behalf which can mean in the interest or aid of. So for each request some processing is done, that processing is on behalf of a single request.
The key idea is that the Web Server is satisfying multiple requests at the same time concurrently. And the issue being addressed is what happens is one request's processing effectively monopolises the Web Server for a period of time, in this case the other requests, concurrently being processed are stalled until the monopolising processing is finished.
Hence to understand this paragraph we need to get definitions of some technical terms but also need some quite detailed technical background information about multi-threaded concurrent processing.
The only slightly tricky English here is the on behalf, which becomes clear when we understand the relationship between a request and its processing.
Best Answer
The prepositions of and about add some indirection to the sentence. For example:
The first means that you know him personally: the second means that you have information or experience of him. The third sentence could either mean that you don't have information about him, or that you do have information and it's not very favourable. The final sentence means that you have heard about him (you know that he exists) but you don't know him personally and don't have any information about him.
Looking at the sentences 1 and 2:
The first sentence suggests that you don't have any information about how you took care of her: this might be used to indicate that the speaker doesn't know whether you did the job well or not.
In the second sentence, how is ambiguous: it could relate to what care was given (what specifically was done), or to how it was possible for you to give care to her (what obstacles were overcome).
The latter might be the case if both speaker and listener know that the person whom the listener took care of has in the past been unkind to the listener. For example, if she is the listener's mother, and she had an argument with the listener five years ago and hasn't spoken to her since.
For sentences 3 and 4, good is often used as an adverb in American English, but in Brtish English, we think that good is an adjective and well is the corresponding adverb. For avoidance of doubt (as the lawyers say), I have replaced good by well. The preposition in makes sense if party is a political party. If you want to talk about a social event, you would have to use the preposition at.
Sentence 3 indicates that the speaker is in the process of assembling information about how well he will perform, and has not yet made their mind up.
In sentence 4, the speaker is stating an opinion, and almost-fact, about how well he will perform.