On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 09:19:17AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> No! The threaded MPM does NOT and was not intended to implement a
> thread-only server. It was designed to implement a hybrid thread/process
> server. Because we expect both threads and processes, the rest of this
> message is based on a misconception. Having multiple processes each with
> multiple threads provides for FAR more robustness than just a single
> process with multiple threads. If you want that, then you want the
> perchild MPM, so that the number of threads can grow and shrink correctly.
What are we gaining by having multiple children processes? I certainly
don't think the robustness gained by having multiple children processes
is all that great. And, it serves to make the threaded MPM code almost
unmaintainble. Perchild looks a little closer, but I still think it is
tainted by having multiple children processes. Oh, and it needs the
POD fix as well.
By having the possibility of having other children processes, you now
need a mechanism to kill all threads in the same process efficiently.
You'd need to kick them out of the accept mutex, but I'm not seeing
how that's going to happen quickly. -- justin
