On Mon, 20 May 2002, Greg Stein wrote: > On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 12:32:20PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > On Win32, we load-unload-reload the parent, then load-unload-reload > > the child config. Losing both redundant unload-load sequences will > > be a huge win at startup. > > Yup. If we process the tree in a much smarter fashion, then nothing > should need to be unloaded.
One thing I _like_ about the load-unload-reload is that it generally forces you (the module author) to consider the graceful restart case, rather than simply crashing (or getting buggy) the first time someone does it. [Sorry if you're using those terms in a technical fashion that I'm not following.] OTOH, on Windows the parent and child both have to load things, so you get a similar effect. [Speaking of this, one thing I'd like to see for Windows would be a way for the parent process to cache the config (or parse tree) and pass it directly to the child, so that you don't have the possibility of changing config when a new child is spawned due to MaxRequestsPerChild. Yeah, I _should_ submit a patch rather than a request.] Later, scott
