httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <dgau...@arctic.org>
Subject Re: Apache 2.0 ideas
Date Tue, 03 Nov 1998 07:47:28 GMT


On Tue, 3 Nov 1998, Andrew Finkenstadt wrote:

> On further reflection and after reading the "Halloween Document" (
> http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/halloween.html ) and Microsoft's alleged desire to
> more tightly integrate IIS into the kernel, ...

IBM and Sun have already done it. 

> Yes, it would leave behind many flavors of Unix that don't have good support
> for shared memory, but it would beat the pants out of Microsoft.

Why worry about shared memory?  We're not going to get anywhere further in
the performance game without threads.  There's no point in even worrying
about comparing the performance of unixes that lack threads... if they
lack threads they probably also lack all the fundamental TCP/IP
improvements necessary to even think about comparing HTTP performance.

> We should take a page from Oracle's book on semaphores and enqueues, by making
> the critical sections as small as possible, and as fine-grained as possible,
> allowing multiple processes access to the data without road-blocking.

There's essentially no userland syncrhonization required in a static
content web server (i.e. a benchmark web server).  For example on linux
open()/sendfile() should produce the fastest web server possible from
userland... and there's nothing in there which requires userland to
synchronize (you have to do a little magic with memory allocation).  So
this is easy.

Dean



Mime
View raw message