On Mon, 20 May 2002, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 12:32:20PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > On Win32, we load-unload-reload the parent, then load-unload-reload
> > the child config. Losing both redundant unload-load sequences will
> > be a huge win at startup.
>
> Yup. If we process the tree in a much smarter fashion, then nothing
> should need to be unloaded.
One thing I _like_ about the load-unload-reload is that it generally
forces you (the module author) to consider the graceful restart case,
rather than simply crashing (or getting buggy) the first time someone does
it. [Sorry if you're using those terms in a technical fashion that I'm
not following.]
OTOH, on Windows the parent and child both have to load things, so you get
a similar effect.
[Speaking of this, one thing I'd like to see for Windows would be a way
for the parent process to cache the config (or parse tree) and pass it
directly to the child, so that you don't have the possibility of changing
config when a new child is spawned due to MaxRequestsPerChild. Yeah, I
_should_ submit a patch rather than a request.]
Later,
scott
|