httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <dgau...@arctic.org>
Subject Re: PR#2829 and related ones (semctl)
Date Thu, 17 Sep 1998 15:51:34 GMT
Yeah like two orders of magnitude better if the IRIX box has multiple
CPUs.  But that was ages ago.  Things may have changed.  And it's clear
that IRIX isn't set up by default to support sysvsem.  So changing it back
to whatever was used in 1.2 seems fine... there's a bunch of docs to go
hit though (upgrading_to_1.3, new_features_1.3, perf_tuning... maybe
more).

Dean

On Thu, 17 Sep 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > PR#2829 talks about the same problem a lot of users
> > reported on sw-mod-ssl and c.i.w.s.u:
> > 
> > Under IRIX they get:
> > "semctl(IPC_SET): Bad address at server startup"
> > 
> > That's the semctl from the accept mutex stuff in http_main.c
> > The users worked around it by using -DUSE_FCNTL_SERIALIZED_ACCEPT
> > on IRIX. Can someone with IRIX experiences look at this, please?
> >                                        
> 
> Weren't there benchmarks somewhere that detailed if the IRIX shared-mem mutex
> was quicker than just using fcntl or maybe even flock?
> 
> -- 
> ===========================================================================
>    Jim Jagielski   |||   jim@jaguNET.com   |||   http://www.jaguNET.com/
>             "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul,
>             cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"
> 


Mime
View raw message