httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jorge Schrauwen" <jorge.schrau...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: MPMs, COW vs Child Process Spawning
Date Wed, 29 Oct 2008 19:35:14 GMT
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm> wrote:

> Paul Querna wrote:
>
>  One of the things I would like to do on the Simple MPM is unify how child
>> processes are created on win32 and unix.
>>
>> On Win32, there is no fork, so roughly speaking what the current winnt MPM
>> creates a new process, and feeds the configuration over a pipe to the new
>> child.
>>
>> On Unix, all of the current MPMs use fork, and do not execute a new
>> process, but instead then drop privileges and continue running.
>>
>> What I would like to do, is change Unix to use the same pattern as on
>> Windows.
>>
>
> Hmmm.
>
> I think for a large configurations, the copy on write is a significant
> optimisation - you can have large numbers of processes, and a large
> configuration, and get away with it, as practically the configuration is
> only memory resident once.
>
> I think it would be important to still support both, but certainly the code
> to support both shouldn't be at all complex. Perhaps the choice of which to
> choose could be configurable, so that Leopard users could choose "config via
> pipe".
>

If you are going to implement both methodes...
fork() should be used and exec and pipe the config as a fallback.

Then I know nothing about mpm's so I'll keep quite now.


>
> Although the MPM should be simple, it should ideally not be so simplified
> to become simplistic.
>
> Regards,
> Graham
> --


~ Jorge

Mime
View raw message