>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]