On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > > On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > >> On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote: > >>> On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch <[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> > >>> > >>> wrote: > >>> Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients > >>> should be renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the > >>> number of worker threads, not the number of clients. As > >>> with the MaxRequestsPerChild -> MaxConnectionsPerChild > >>> rename, we would still accept the old name with a warning. > >>> Thoughts? > >>> > >>> +1. That's more accurate for sure, and more important when you > >>> loose the 1:1 thread:connection ratio. > >> > >> Can we call this MaxRequestWorkers, now that we have different > >> sorts of workers living in the same process? > > > > Good point. Committed as r1137744 > > That kind of last-minute change is going to kill people trying to > upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 with a shared config. We should make > MaxRequestWorkers an alias for MaxClients in a released 2.2.x
I think you missed that MaxClients still works in 2.4 (albeit with a warning on startup). So I don't think it's such a big deal.
