Hello Tom,
Just to clarify: are you saying that forking is better than threading on windows? Even if it is, I will have to throw in IPC to talk between the forks?
Tom Schindl wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Foo Ji-Haw schrieb:
| Hello Michael,
|
| Are you saying that Perl with ithreads is slower, therefore
| implementation of threading on Perl is generally avoided?
|
| I write apps for both Windows and UNIX platforms. I thought that
| iThreads is the better alternative to forking, which I think is not well
| implemented in Windows.
|
As far as I know there's only a threaded mpm for Apache2 available on win32. If you have to support win32 and unix your modules must certainly be thread aware which means you can not use all functions mod_perl-provides to you. e.g. setting the document_root is one of those if I remember correctly. You cannot use perls "chdir", ... .
Perl with compiled threads support (used or not used) is much slower and when new threads are started the whole memory is copied over because there's no copy-on-write logic like there is for fork.
Tom
| Michael Peters wrote:
|
|> Foo Ji-Haw wrote:
|>
|>
|>> Hello Philip,
|>>
|>> You are suggesting that FBSD 4.x is not easy to compile ithreads via
|>> ports. I wonder why FBSD even on 5.x does not come with ithreads
|>> precompiled (Linux does!). But I find it quite a deterent to use FBSD
|>> for multiple apps in the future.
|>>
|>
|>
|> One of the biggest complaints I hear (and voice) is that the linux
|> distros ship a perl with ithreads. It's slower and almost noone wants or
|> needs it. It looks like FBSD is doing what the majority of people want
|> it to do, so I wouldn't knock it :)
|>
|>
|>
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCbzONkVPeOFLgZFIRAoT7AJ9SVaXiBQvNNWwebKZHhJeblbFnVQCfQCWf u31I+dYacvfshbdzVwW2IQE= =drPU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
