Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 15 Jul 1999 12:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Tani Hosokawa <unknown@riverstyx.net>
To:        David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>
Cc:        lh@aus.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   RE: Known MMAP() race conditions ... ?
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.10.9907151211190.10288-100000@avarice.riverstyx.net>
In-Reply-To: <000101becef4$966499b0$021d85d1@youwant.to>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Thu, 15 Jul 1999, David Schwartz wrote:

> > > 	If Apache went to a model as bad as 'one thread per
> > request', you'd do
> > > better to advise switching to another web server instead.
> >
> > "went to"?  Right now it's a one *process* per request.  Have you ever run
> > Apache?
> 
> 	Sure. I run it on many machines, including several that are very heavily
> loaded.
> 
> 	It's one-process-per-request model is atrocious. If they're going to go to
> the trouble to fix it, they should actually fix it. Going to
> one-thread-per-request is just silly.
>
> 	If you're going to make a threaded program, you should do it right. A
> half-assed threaded program may even be worse than a well-designed
> one-process-per-request program.

Again, off in theory.  Fact is, the threaded server is faster than the
per-process model.  And, it's not just going to go away.

---
tani hosokawa
river styx internet




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.10.9907151211190.10288-100000>