httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <...@algroup.co.uk>
Subject Re: Moving things around
Date Sun, 07 May 2000 17:03:04 GMT
Sascha Schumann wrote:
> 
> > We don't. If the user specifies disable-threads, then the prefork MPM
> > _must_ be chosen, coz its the only one that will work.
> 
> Just because prefork is currently the only non-threaded MPM does
> not mean that there will be no other one with the same
> requirements.

I know. But it doesn't affect my point.

> > > It makes much more sense to me to let users choose whatever MPM
> > > they want. Then the MPM tells APR what it needs to operate, and
> > > not the other way around.
> >
> > But then modules that use other APR features would be screwed. Which is
> > why APR must support everything available, not merely what the current
> > MPM needs.
> 
> Define "other APR features."

Err, threading, for example?

> We are basically only talking about enabling/disabling threads in
> APR depending on what the MPM requires. Why should some other
> module care about threading issues?

Because some other module may need threading!

> > MPM is really just another module. Its needs are not tbe be-all and
> > end-all of Apache's needs.
> 
> While this is true from a programmer's perspective, the
> requirements of the MPM affect the build process drastically.
> In that way, MPMs are considered special.

Yes, but I can still see no rational reason to exclude functionality
from APR simply because an MPM doesn't need it.

Cheers,

Ben.

--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html

Mime
View raw message