>Perrin Harkins wrote: 
>> On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 14:20 -0400, Stas Bekman wrote: 
>> 
>>>Philip M. Gollucci wrote: 
>>> 
>>>>Perrin Harkins wrote: 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>Are you talking about separate pools of interpreters perl vhost? Is 
>>>>>that really working? 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>I donn't think is works yet as this need will use the perlchild MPM which 
>>>>isn't finished and isn't currently being actively developed by httpd. 
>>> 
>>>Not quite. It does "work" even with the prefork mpm. But there are issues. 
>> 
>> 
>> If I say something like "Improved isolation of servers for easier use in 
>> ISPs" is that overstating it? My concern is that an ISP would ask us 
>> about this after seeing the release and we'd look foolish saying, "well, 
>> it doesn't really work well enough to use yet." 

>Separate pools of interpreters per vhost work, but it has no relation to 
>the ISPs whose problem is a secure separation between users. But perchild 
>(and its equivalents) aren't there yet, though it has nothing to do with 
>mod_perl (it's on the apache playground). Though I've heard that metux 
>mpm[1] is used by some people in production. I haven't tried it, so I 
>can't tell if it works under mod_perl. 

>[1] http://www.metux.de/mpm/en/?patpage=

There's also Peruser MPM http://www.telana.com/peruser.php
It's an alpha, but the development going on. Peruser seems to be more
suitable for MP2 than Metux, because it uses precesses instead of threads.
That's all I know. I haven't tested it yet.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://izbori2005.netinfo.bg - Избори 2005 - Само най-важното. Виж, чуй, 
прочети и избери!

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to