httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian Behlendorf <br...@collab.net>
Subject Re: On 2.0 again.
Date Mon, 19 Feb 2001 18:51:39 GMT

I believe beta is a statement that you are ready for the next wave of
testers to descend and give it a try; not necessarily that they should
expect it to run flawlessly in a heavy environment, but that you're also
not expecting it to core dump on a daily basis for an average site.

Speaking of which, there are 5 corefiles in /usr/local/apache2/corefiles
from the current process if anyone wants to look at them.  Looks like we
segfault once every couple of hours or so, so this is really scraping the
bottom of the barrel.  =)

Back to the point - it would be nice for someone to be testing the
pthread mpm on a production server, something that gets >1M hits/day, with
minimal segfaulting, before beta.  I don't have an environment like that
to offer unfortunately.

	Brian

On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> 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 :-)
>
> Bill


Mime
View raw message