Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> I like (though not addicted to) the idea
> of keeping the directive names the same (or nearly so) across MPMs. I like
> the following:
>
> StartWorkers - workers are processes in the prefork mpm and threads in
> threaded mpms
> MaxWorkers - upper limit on the max number of workers
> MinSpareWorkers - minimum number of idle workers to maintain
> MaxSpareWorkers - max, number of idle workers to maintain
so far so good...
> MaxWorkersPerChildProcess - Not a great name. This directive only applies to a
> threaded MPM. a.k.a, threadsperchild.
This one bugs me a little. In this case, we should make it clear that
we are talking about threads. It could be important. I know at least
one OS that has constraints on the number of threads per process. How
about just "MaxThreadsPerProcess" or "MaxWorkerThreadsPerProcess"? I
like the first one better myself. But the second may tie things
together better for a newbie, and if we ever have a few specialized
non-worker threads, it would be clear that they aren't counted in the
limit. I don't see a need to keep the "Child" term.
>
> Notice that for a threaded MPM, you have no direct way to specify number of
> child processes started. Number of child processes is
> StartWorkers/MaxWorkersPerChildProcess.
>
I don't see a problem with that.
Greg
