httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <>
Subject Re: On 2.0 again.
Date Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:56:54 GMT

> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > From: <>
> > > FreeBSD's threads library is incredibly poor.  It seems that whenever we
> > > enable threads on FreeBSD sendfile stops working.
> >
> > Just a thought... Lets run 2.0 on with the process MPM for
> > few more days to drive out the few seg faults we are still seeing. Once it
> > is -really- stable, disable sendfile support on FreeBSD and compile and
run the
> > threaded MPM using MMAP.   When we get the threaded MPM working
> > declare beta.
> It's more than just sendfile.  When we compiled apache with -pthread, and
> using the prefork MPM, we had threads go off to no-where.  I am not
> willing to say we can't go beta until is running a threaded
> MPM, because that may not be possible.
> Also, this isn't our model anymore, and this discussion should be on
> new-httpd, not members.

Ooops, new-httpd dropped out of my first reply to this thread. Apologies.

Humm, I believe I implicitly assume a release status of "beta" is basically a
statement regarding "quality" of the server ("Quality" in the sense of "Zen
and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance").  Is this not the model we are
following? My goal was to get a threaded server running to facilitate driving
bugs out of that MPM; improving the quality of a major feature of Apache 2.0.
If "beta" status is not a statement of quality, then I don't understand why we
go to the trouble of making the designation in the first place. Perhaps I
should write up a neat little random naming facility that makes up status
names. Next release can be alpha 1000, then maybe beta 75, then golden
followed by alpha centauri :-)


View raw message