apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)" <madhusudan_mathiha...@hp.com>
Subject RE: [PATCH]1. SHMEM (repost)
Date Fri, 09 Nov 2001 05:41:41 GMT
I was wondering if anybody had a chance to review the both the patches
(SHMEM, SHMHT & SHMCB).. I'd be really interested in knowing your feedback..


-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Bloom [mailto:rbb@covalent.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 7:04 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org; Cliff Woolley; 'dev@httpd.apache.org'
Subject: Re: [PATCH]1. SHMEM (repost)

On Tuesday 06 November 2001 10:26 pm, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> > >I guess I'd also like to know what value this shared memory cache adds
> > >for mod_ssl.  I'm not at all clear on how shared memory would make
> > >SSL any better - as SSL is only a connection-oriented protocol and
> > >shouldn't use shared memory.  None of the MPMs in httpd migrate
> > >connections between processes (I don't see this changing anytime soon).
> > >Since SSL works on the connection level, I'm not sure what this is.
> > >So, I guess some explanation here would do wonders.  -- justin
> Anyway, what about perchild?  That MPM does in fact pass connections (or
> is it just requests?) from one process to another.  Do perchild and
> mod_ssl even work together?  I've never tried it.

Perchild hasn't worked properly since we removed BUFF.  I worked on it
for a while, but I didn't see a solution to the problem.  A few weeks ago,
I did see the solution, which was to use a filter to solve the problem of
having the data to send to the other child.  I'm hoping to fix this in the
next two weeks.


Ryan Bloom				rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies			rbb@covalent.net

View raw message