s/connection/process/
> > MaxRequestsPerChild == 0 means that a connection can stay up and serve requests
indefinitely.
> > Setting it to INT_MAX puts an upper bound (a very large upper bound) on the number
>of
requests that
> > can be served on a connection. I doubt this is of practical concern though. My
>main
concern... is
> > this patch portable? Is INT_MAX defined everywhere consistently?
>
rbb says...
> Wait a second, our user configured the server so that the child process
> never terminates. That's what our docs say that directive does. This
> says, well, we just take a really long time to terminate. Either the
> patch needs to be backed out, or the docs need to change. I personally
> would rather keep the 0 meaning the child process never dies.
>
Yea, I think I agree on principle of least astonishment. The cases where this could
cause
a problem are few (if they exist at all) but would be a bitch to debug. Consider the
servers used to handle the Olympics. They take a wicked numbr of hits and may not be
recycled for the duration of the event.
Bill
