Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 27449 invoked by uid 6000); 21 Nov 1997 19:39:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 27442 invoked from network); 21 Nov 1997 19:39:27 -0000 Received: from twinlark.arctic.org (305@204.62.130.91) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 21 Nov 1997 19:39:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 29948 invoked by uid 500); 21 Nov 1997 19:42:02 -0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 11:42:02 -0800 (PST) From: Dean Gaudet To: "new-httpd@apache.org" Subject: Re: http_main.c In-Reply-To: <199711210616.RAA18442@silk.apana.org.au> Message-ID: Legal: "Copyright (c) 1997 Dean Gaudet, all rights reserved. Visit http://www.arctic.org/~dgaudet/legal for more information." Organization: Transmeta Corp. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Oh certainly, and you can have the honour of doing the full multithreaded OS/2 port :) I must get off my butt and write up my design for the process model api so we can argue about it. Even unix boxes are better off threading. Dean On Fri, 21 Nov 1997, Brian Havard wrote: > On Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:25:02 -0800 (PST), Dean Gaudet wrote: > > >> - One process as master, N process as Servers > > > >Unix, OS/2 both use this model. > > OS/2 would be much more efficient using multiple threads instead of multiple > processes. fork()ing isn't supported by OS/2 itself and is emulated (slowly) > by the EMX library. EMX is designed to make porting unix apps easy. > > BTW, OS/2 was multithreading before Windoze was even at v3.0 :) > > -- > ______________________________________________________________________________ > | Brian Havard | "He is not the messiah! | > | brianh@kheldar.apana.org.au | He's a very naughty boy!" - Life of Brian | > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >