On 19 Jul 2001 06:44:41 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> > Hey, it serves pages on my Linux 2.4/glibc-2.2 box. This is a
> > proof-of-concept. Would any committer (remember, I'm not a committer
> > to httpd-2.0) be interested in committing a working and clean spmt
> > MPM if I submitted one?
>
> How does this MPM scale? Meaning do I always have to have MaxClients
> threads in my process? How does this handle graceful restart (either it
> becomes mpmt, or it stops serving pages if one thread is handling a
> long-lived request)?
>
> Before this is committed to the code, I would ask one question. Do we
> really want sites using an SPMT MPM? If not, then we should not commit
> it. If it is there, people will use it, and we will have to maintain it.
> If we don't care, then guess I don't care if we commit it. For myself, I
> don't want people using this MPM at a live site, so I would be -0.5 for
> having it in the tree.
>
maybe we need a 'experimental' area in the MPM area (like the module
directory does) with the usual disclaimer of no support, may format your
harddrive, send out spam etc etc etc.
that way Justin can get the benefit of peer review/contributions without
the pain of having it supported.
> I know Windows and OS/2 are essentially SPMT MPMs, and we are telling
> people to use those MPMs on those platforms. However, the experts on
> those platforms are saying this is the correct solution for Windows and
> OS/2. I disagree that this is a valid MPM for Unix.
>
> Ryan
> _____________________________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
--
Ian Holsman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Performance Measurement & Analysis
CNET Networks - (415) 364-8608
