You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@httpd.apache.org by Shankar Unni <sh...@netscape.net> on 2005/01/22 01:19:53 UTC
[users@httpd] Is mpm_worker "production ready" in Apache 2.0.5x?
What the subject says - why isn't mpm_worker the default by now in the
2.0.* series? Is it not "production ready"?
Just as an aside: are there many people using mpm_worker (or anything
other than mpm_prefork on Unixen) in "production-like" environments?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] Re: Is mpm_worker "production ready" in Apache
2.0.5x?
Posted by "Ivan Barrera A." <Br...@Ivn.cl>.
Hi !
I'm rewriting a module, and i want to make it available to windows, and
mpm worker.
In the mod, im using shared memory. What things do i have to take in
account ?
I mean, how dows worker mpm work ? they share memory ?
Shankar Unni wrote:
> Joshua Slive wrote:
>
>> It is "production ready" and fully supported. It is not the default
>> because it will create problems if you use apache with non-threadsafe
>> third-party modules (or third-party modules that use non-thread-safe
>> libraries).
>
>
> Excellent. Our module is thread-safe, but I had noticed that none of our
> customers are running mpm_worker, and wondered about this.
>
> (In fact, we have some performance issues because we start an observer
> thread in each httpd process, each talking to a common server, and were
> getting killed when we got up to several hundred httpd's. mpm_worker is
> a much better configuration for our module, because we only need one per
> process..)
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
> See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
[users@httpd] Re: Is mpm_worker "production ready" in Apache 2.0.5x?
Posted by Shankar Unni <sh...@netscape.net>.
Joshua Slive wrote:
> It is "production ready" and fully supported. It is not the default
> because it will create problems if you use apache with non-threadsafe
> third-party modules (or third-party modules that use non-thread-safe
> libraries).
Excellent. Our module is thread-safe, but I had noticed that none of our
customers are running mpm_worker, and wondered about this.
(In fact, we have some performance issues because we start an observer
thread in each httpd process, each talking to a common server, and were
getting killed when we got up to several hundred httpd's. mpm_worker is
a much better configuration for our module, because we only need one per
process..)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] Is mpm_worker "production ready" in Apache 2.0.5x?
Posted by Joshua Slive <js...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:19:53 -0800, Shankar Unni
<sh...@netscape.net> wrote:
> What the subject says - why isn't mpm_worker the default by now in the
> 2.0.* series? Is it not "production ready"?
It is "production ready" and fully supported. It is not the default
because it will create problems if you use apache with non-threadsafe
third-party modules (or third-party modules that use non-thread-safe
libraries).
> Just as an aside: are there many people using mpm_worker (or anything
> other than mpm_prefork on Unixen) in "production-like" environments?
I believe that there are quite a few people using worker in production
environments, but I don't have any statistics.
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org