httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aram W. Mirzadeh" <...@qosina.com>
Subject Re: votes for current patch round...
Date Tue, 05 Sep 1995 15:24:22 GMT
At 10:17 AM 9/5/95 EDT, you wrote:
>First, explanations for the vetoes:
>
>interrupt_accept: 
>
>  I've already aired my objections to this one, but for the record:
>
>  By all accounts, the pause problems on linux, as with similar
>  problems long since observed on other systems, are due to the number
>  of pending connections on the port 80 socket exceeding the kernel's
>  fixed limit.  This patch does not cure that problem.  Furthermore,
>  if the problem is cured properly (by raising the limit, however you
>  do that on Linux --- it wouldn't surprise me if it requires
>  recompiling the kernel, since that's what's needed on SunOS), then
>  the patch is not needed.  

This is not a kernel bug.  It's a TCP bug, which recompiling the kernel 
does not fix.  There is no value in linux for this to increase.  Linux's kernel
is all source, so it's not as complicated as SunOS and such... anyway as 
I said, we really don't have to include the patch in the disterbution, but have
it as a 'if you're having problems try this patch'.   I belive it should be
included
as a http_main.c.linux file.  

Another pointer I would like to make is, whatever problems it may cause on
other system, the combination of this patch, and linux-1.2.13 does fix the 
problem, maybe it should be a #ifdef LINUX <patch>  #else <nopatch> #endif
case?

>
>  If there is a separate Linux bug, different from the
>  pending-connections limit, which is cured by this patch, I'll lift
>  the veto, but that can only be tested by running an unmodified
>  server with a fixed kernel.

That's all I belive... no other problems.

--
Aram W. Mirzadeh, MIS Manager, Qosina Corporation
http://www.qosina.com/~awm/, awm@qosina.com
Apache httpd server team http://www.apache.org



Mime
View raw message