[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On 1 Mar 2001, Jeff Trawick wrote: > > > dean gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > why do you start more than one process in the default configuration? > > > > > > -dean > > > > Heck, I don't know... I suggested 1, Ryan wanted 2 or 3. 1 still > > makes the most sense to me. > > I suggested 2 or 3 just for a bit of redundancy. In the current model, > there are likely to be problems, and I think we should acknowledge that > fact. If we go with 1, and that process seg-faults due to code in the MPM > or the core, we take the hit of starting a second child. So we need to optimize for seg faults? C'mon...I certainly hope not. Greg
