From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue May 9 10:06:09 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id KAA19713 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 9 May 1995 10:06:09 -0700 Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id KAA19707 for ; Tue, 9 May 1995 10:06:06 -0700 Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA02008; Tue, 9 May 95 10:57:07 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Message-Id: <9505091657.AA02008@cs.weber.edu> Subject: Re: Apache + FreeBSD 2.0 benchmark results (fwd) To: taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw (Brian Tao) Date: Tue, 9 May 95 10:57:06 MDT Cc: nc@ai.net, Arjan.deVet@nl.cis.philips.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, Guido.VanRooij@nl.cis.philips.com In-Reply-To: from "Brian Tao" at May 9, 95 12:48:46 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52] Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Yes. So are the Apache, WN and pre-1.4 NCSA servers. I needed a > name for servers which forked off a new process for each incoming > request, and just "forking server" was too easily confused with > "pre-forking server", so I called them "demand forking". Dunno if > that's the correct term or not, but I'm sticking with it. ;-) The correct term for "pre-forking" is "spawn-ahead". Actually, a lot of UNIX kernels keep process templates around, which are most of the generic process information but none of the specific so as to optimize forking benchmarks (hint, hint). Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.