httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@devsys.jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: HARD_SERVER_LIMIT
Date Sat, 04 Dec 1999 13:57:43 GMT
Wilfredo Sanchez wrote:
> 
>   Is there any reason why Windows has a larger HARD_SERVER_LIMIT  
> than Unix?  Why not bump up the value to 1024 for Unix as well?
> 
>   Apparently the apple.com guys don't want to use Apache because  
> they've run into this limit when they tried it out. I can build them  
> one with a larger limit, but I'm wondering if I should just change  
> this limit for the built-in Apache on OS X, since we have no reason  
> to think the system will crap out, and in any case we'd fix it if it  
> did.  Is that a reasonable thing to do?
> 

HARD_SERVER_LIMIT affects a few table sizes, mostly scoreboard
related. Under Windows, it affects the number of threads, but under
UNIX it controls the number of processes, so we're comparing
apples and oranges (Sorry, couldn't resist) :)

Under UNIX, with higher numbers, you could run into a process
table limit with much bigger numbers. It's assumed that the
knowledgeable person who has bumped up these kernel tables, as
well as "assuring" themselves that 512-1024 httpd processes won't
turn the server into a brick, will add the compile-time define
in Configuration that '-DHARD_SERVER_LIMIT=1024' or whatever.

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   jim@jaguNET.com   [|]   http://www.jaguNET.com/
                "Are you suggesting coconuts migrate??"

Mime
View raw message