httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David D'Antonio" <>
Subject RE: NT to do list
Date Mon, 12 Jan 1998 15:33:57 GMT
On Saturday, January 10, 1998 1:01 PM, Paul Sutton [] wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jan 1998, David D'Antonio wrote:
> > >   Replacement for signal handling.  Paul's recent
> > >   changes might cover this, when I glanced at the original
> > >   they seemed to provide an named event that could be zapped 
> > >   to inject the equivalent of signal, but not a tool to
> > >   do the zapping.  - Doc to explain mechinism required.


> At some point in the future it would be nice to have a way of calling into
> the running Apache parent process -- say via DCOM -- and that call would
> initiate the restart or shutdown (by calling start_restart or
> start_shutdown). If DCOM is too complex (and I think it is, at the moment) 
> there may be other ways of getting into into a running process -- perhaps
> create a separate thread and get that thread to have a message loop,
> somehow. Is that possible? 

I don't know of any way to just create a message loop, especially for a
console app. I wrote the tray app for Purveyor to give it a message loop
on Win95 (for things like WM_SHUTDOWN). I personally think DCOM is
way too complex for this sorta stuff.
> Anyway, probably a better way is to create a new event for each type of
> signal -- say "apache-restart", "apache-stop" -- then create a new thread
> in the parent process which waits on all these external signals. When one
> gets raised, it called start_shutdown or start_restart as necessary. 

This is what we did for the Win95 version of Purveyor and the module that
the tray app uses was conditionalized for Win95/NT. The 95 side used the
events, the NT side use the SCM user messages.

> > MS certainly believes that TransmitFile is the way to go (unless
> > ISAPI filters need access to the outgoing stream)
> Well, Apache doesn't currently work with ISAPI filters. I think if we go
> to TransmitFile and friends we really need to completely re-organise the
> way that data is transmitted to make it into a fully overlappedIO-aware
> application. I.e. reduce the number of threads and get each to work
> asynchronously on multiple overlapped IOs -- like MS tells you to do for
> fast IO. Shame they had to make async IO so different from the familar
> Unix IO. 

Eventually, Apache will get ISAPI filters, right? So you might not want to
adopt a solution that will require re-write later.

As for UNIX, isn't that some legacy (single threaded) app or system or
something? :-)
> //pcs


David D'Antonio CNE -
 Some they do and some they don't and some ya just can't tell
  Some they will and some they won't and some it's just as well

View raw message