[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > or just wait for REBOL/Command to launch another instance of REBOL
> > itself :-) Well, a little bit inefficient in comparison to threading, as
> > whole REBOL interpreter will be loaded into memory once again. But
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > doesn't Apache use separate processes in opposite to threads of IIS
> > anyway?
>
> It's not mainly about memory. Memory is handled quite effieciently, cause
> only writable pages have to be copied (on 'write-deman' only), and others
> are shared, which actually is not unefficient. There is some overhead with
> the fork, but this implies to _very_ heavy loads (local intranet I'd say -
> if it's dynamic content, the load comes from other tasks, and thus doesn't
> create that many instances) So from the memory point of view, it's not
> that bad. (IMHO)
OK, let's say my app uses dlls in Windows. When I start two instances of my
apps - are those dlls loaded for each one separately or are they shared (I
don't think so :-)
btw: diky za vysvetleni :-)
-pekr-
>
>
> $0.02
> Jano
