Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-new-httpd-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 13466 invoked by uid 500); 17 Nov 2000 20:50:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list new-httpd@apache.org Received: (qmail 13438 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2000 20:50:45 -0000 From: Jim Jagielski Message-Id: <200011172050.PAA26110@devsys.jaguNET.com> Subject: Reaping of idle Apache child processes To: new-httpd@apache.org Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:50:41 -0500 (EST) Reply-To: jim@jaguNET.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N In both 1.3 and 2.0, when we kill off the idle child process in perform_idle_server_maintenance(), we simply choose the highest numbered idle process. I think it would make sense to choose the highest numbered and highest cpu used idle process (basically, the highest numbered and most "used" process). Might be a good way of handling memory leaks as well as possibly preventing some minor thrashing in killing a recently created, under-used process. Comments? -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "Casanova will have many weapons; To beat him you will have to have more than forks and flatulence."