From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Feb 19 9:21: 0 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx01-a.netapp.com (mx01-a.netapp.com [198.95.226.53]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5609737B400 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 09:20:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from frejya.corp.netapp.com (frejya [10.10.20.91]) by mx01-a.netapp.com (8.11.1/8.11.1/NTAP-1.2) with ESMTP id g1JHJx328762; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 09:19:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from cranford-be.eng (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by frejya.corp.netapp.com (8.12.2/8.12.2/NTAP-1.4) with ESMTP id g1JHJwE0019912; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 09:19:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (kmacy@localhost) by cranford-be.eng (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g1JHJu100163; Tue, 19 Feb 2002 09:19:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 09:19:56 -0800 (PST) From: Kip Macy To: Dominic Marks Cc: Peter Wemm , Mike Silbersack , Hiten Pandya , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: In-Kernel HTTP Server (name preference) In-Reply-To: <20020219092058.A78717@host213-123-131-110.in-addr.bto> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Apache will switch to this method at some point. I really can't > understand why they went with that complicated pre-forking stuff. > Using non-blockijng I/O is just not that hard." As mentioned previously, due to the blocking semantics of file I/O on unix, single process servers will only provide peak throughput if everything is resident. By pre-forking, data can continued to be served if one process blocks on file I/O. Apache already handles multiple connections within a process, so it does something like this already. -Kip To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message