Eli Marmor wrote:
Being slashdotted, will be also a good heavy-load test for daedalus,
which runs 2.0.32... ;-)
Except that, IIRC, daedalis is running prefork exclusively. Has any
large site utilized worker?
--
===
I have a pretty major concern about releasing .32 as a GA product. We
haven't had a whole lot of beta's. I would really like to get this beta
into a lot of people's hands, and hopefully get our next release to be a
GA release. I think that the best way to do this, is to send a message
From: Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 12:56 AM
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Brian Pane wrote:
I have one concern about 2.0.32 as a GA candidate.
In order to fix the last of the performance problems
in 2.0.x, we'll need to incorporate free lists for
buckets
Cliff Woolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Brian Pane wrote:
I have one concern about 2.0.32 as a GA candidate.
In order to fix the last of the performance problems
in 2.0.x, we'll need to incorporate free lists for
buckets (the stuff that Cliff is working on).
I
Ryan Bloom wrote:
I have a pretty major concern about releasing .32 as a GA product. We
haven't had a whole lot of beta's. I would really like to get this beta
into a lot of people's hands, and hopefully get our next release to be a
GA release. I think that the best way to do this, is to
On 16 Feb 2002, Jeff Trawick wrote:
It is easy to prevent people from doing the same thing without
changing the generated code (move the macro to core.c, rename it to
ONLY_LAME_CODE_NEEDS_TO_REMOVE_ZERO_LENGTH_BUCKETS(), whatever floats
your boat). Showstopper? No, IMHO. Something to
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Design and implementation of Apache 2.0 is nearing completion. Module
authors are encouraged to review the Apache 2.0 API and share any
concerns with the Apache development team at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is your best opportunity to ensure that your issues are
addressed prior
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Design and implementation of Apache 2.0 is nearing completion. Module
authors are encouraged to review the Apache 2.0 API and share any
concerns with the Apache development team at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is your best opportunity to ensure that your issues are
Just for the record, it seems someone already saw the tarball and posted it to
freshmeat.
http://freshmeat.net/releases/69982/
Design and implementation of Apache 2.0 is nearing completion. Module
authors are encouraged to review the Apache 2.0 API and share any
concerns with the Apache
Ryan Bloom wrote:
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Design and implementation of Apache 2.0 is nearing completion. Module
authors are encouraged to review the Apache 2.0 API and share any
concerns with the Apache development team at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is your best opportunity to ensure that your issues
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Ian Holsman wrote:
If cliff's changes require a API change, we could do the API
change now (post .32) and that will get the pressure of cliff
on producing the whole patch, leaving him more time to test it.
The API change is almost all of the work. But it's within
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Brian Pane wrote:
I have one concern about 2.0.32 as a GA candidate.
In order to fix the last of the performance problems
in 2.0.x, we'll need to incorporate free lists for
buckets (the stuff that Cliff is working on).
I have another: I consider the existence of
12 matches
Mail list logo
