Okay thanks :) I've printed out most of the 2.0.35 source and am annotating
and it to go into 3 ring binders for quick reference. The 2.x code base is
such a huge milestone over 1.3, which was already super awesome itself.

Billy Rose 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sander Striker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 9:00 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Billy Rose
> Subject: RE: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker worker.c
> 
> 
> > From: Rose, Billy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 18 April 2002 15:47
> 
> > Hummm. What are your thoughts on shmget() allocating a 
> global segment owned
> > by the master process that each child can get at? Is there 
> a Nix out there
> > that doesn't have shmget()?
> 
> I suggest you take a look at APR, specifically
> apr/include/apr_shm.h
> 
> Sander
> 
>  
> > Billy Rose 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Aaron Bannert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 3:19 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker worker.c
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 02:58:03PM -0500, Rose, Billy wrote:
> > > > If I could receive feedback on the following email made on 
> > > the 11th, I'd be
> > > > willing to burn some hours to make the following MPM 
> for testing:
> > > 
> > > I think one part that is missing from this design is how 
> you translate
> > > these "connection objects" between processes. This is not 
> unsolvable,
> > > just an obstacle that may eat into performance. Some of the 
> > > methods that
> > > you might use for this are:
> > > 
> > > - unix domain sockets (named and anonymous both work here)
> > > - doors (* my prefered method, only available on solaris)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I've also been working on an addition to APR that will do this in
> > > a cross-platform manner, called "spipe" (aka Stream 
> Pipes). See some
> > > sample file-descriptor-passing code in the perchild MPM.
> > > 
> > > -aaron
> 

Reply via email to