Guys, this is as designed. The worst case, is while the server is stopping and
starting
child process (gracefully only) very quickly, we can get MaxClients*ThreadsPerChild
processes. This is okay, because the user is really trying to tell us how many
threads they want
handling requests, not how many processes they want. We only ever go over the
MaxClients if
we have processes shutting down.
I am willing to believe that we are starting processes too quickly, but that is a bug
in the
implementation, not the design.
Ryan
On Friday 27 July 2001 06:40, Paul J. Reder wrote:
> Actually, it dawned on me that this is worse than I stated.
>
> There is no limit to processes joining a slot. If
> perform_idle_server_maintenance deems it necessary to start more processes,
> a new process can start within a slot where other processes are still
> starting, but haven't yet grabbed all of the unused workers.
>
> Because there is no locking, more than one process can grab the same worker
> slot. I have not looked to see what problems this can cause, but two or
> more processes each starting a worker in the same slot can't be good.
--
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
