On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > 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.
Perhaps we should lower the severity from warning to info? Not every admin needs constant reminders while they are running 2.2 and 2.4 from a single config.
