could you have a mpm group of functions to determine the
capabilites of the installed MPM.
a function to show the name of it,
it's threading model
and maybe a string description of the configuration of it.
so for example
for mpm_prefork it would be "pre-fork" as a threading model, and it would read "30 At
Start, Max of 50 (Hard: 400), ... "
where mpm_threaded would be "pthread" as a threading model, and it would say something
like "5 processes, each 10 threads"
maybe also a set of 'cabaility' functions
mpm_has_shared_mem
mpm_has_multiple_contexts_per_process (for threaded)
that way a module writer could query the MPM for what kind of capabilities it has, and
could
adjust it's own behavior accordingly.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 8:38 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mpm_query_2
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Harrie Hazewinkel wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Harrie Hazewinkel wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I have made a new patch for the mpm_query functionality.
> > > >
> > > > 1) This patch extends the information that can be retrieved.
> > > > 2) It also allows to return an MPM_TYPE which is a string.
> > > > This is used to provide some additional information
> > > > about the MPM used. It even could be used by an MPM
> > > > developper to provide an arbitrary human readable
> > > > string which can be used for management purposes.
> > >
> > > -1 for returning the string from this function. It makes
> the function
> > > harder to read and to use. If you absolutely must have a
> way to query the
> > > MPM name, then use a separate function for it. Something like
> > > ap_show_mpm() like Sander suggested yesterday.
> >
> > You definitly have not understood the use of it.
> > But that does not matter. I know you act like the APACHE
> > 2.0 police.
> >
> > I now start thinking that the MPM_TYPE should be an MPM_DESCR.
> > and for what the ap_show_mpm goes it can use the mpm_query to
> > provide the proper values. IMHO, the ap_show_mpm
> > is a not wrapper around ap_mpm_query.
>
> What?!? How have I not understood the use of it? I have
> simply said that
> adding the ability to return a string from that function
> makes the code
> unnecessarily ugly. I have suggested using a separate function for
> getting the same information that you want. I am not removing
> functionality, I am asking to make the code and the API simpler.
>
> ap_show_mpm should definately not be a wrapper around
> ap_mpm_query. if
> you are going to do that, then just don't create ap_show_mpm.
> The goal is
> to keep the API simple, not to make it overly complex by
> having two ways
> to get the exact same information.
>
> Ryan
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________________
> Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 406 29th St.
> San Francisco, CA 94131
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------
>
>
