httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@lyra.org>
Subject Re: SGI's Accelerating Apache project
Date Sat, 17 Feb 2001 22:43:10 GMT
On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 08:05:05AM -0800, rbb@covalent.net wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
>...
> > But that is the STM itself. We should be able to code *against* the API
> > without being subject to the license terms. (the NPL is non-viral)
> > 
> > It would actually be quite interesting to see APR ported to build against
> > STM and see what happens when the threaded MPM is thrown against APR/STM.
> 
> Personally, I would go the other direction.  Just port the STL to use
> APR.  I just ported the threaded MPm to APR in ten minutes last night (not
> committed, because I came home and left the computer off), so the port
> really shouldn't be that hard.

STM is a new user-level threading package. I think you'd want to put it
under APR.

Porting STM onto APR might be interesting, but I'd be curious as to whether
you'd be able to get the same semantics (e.g. switching to a different
thread of execution). It sounds a bit dubious. STM has an API of about 50
functions, so it might not be a ton of work.

Either approach would be a handful :-)


Anyways... the reason that I said "under" is so that the "threaded" MPM
could just pick up the STM "for free". You might not need a whole new MPM to
work with STM. (I bet there would be a couple #ifdef's tho)

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

Mime
View raw message