httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <>
Subject Re: apache/linux modules
Date Wed, 04 Feb 1998 08:25:26 GMT
The apache core code for dynamic modules is less than optimal regarding
memory usage.  That's what I'm referring to.  Search for


On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, Michael Douglass wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 02, 1998 at 04:13:05PM -0800, Dean Gaudet said:
> > You'll waste some memory this route, but for the 90% case that isn't an
> > issue.
> Why would it be wasting memory with this route?  I know that, at least
> under Solaris, .so code segments are placed in shared memory (hence
> 'shared libraries')...  Wouldn't this actually save memory since having
> 100 servers running will have only a fraction of the amount of code
> space used for the modules as normal?  To me this would be a good think.
> Is that what you mean by the 90% case???  And if that is the case,
> then this concept and idea should be touted as a thing to do.  Although
> I _hardly_ would want a static-only or dynamic-only concept...  One
> in which you have static modules and have the option of loading static
> modules seems a nice compromise.
> Or am I lost?
> -- 
> Michael Douglass
> Texas Networking, Inc.
> <tnet admin> anyway, I'm off, perl code is making me [a] crosseyed toady

View raw message