Why would the AOL team think so selfishly by removing virtual hosting? Do they not care that others rely on their server?
Nothing was lost in removing virtual hosting, except the difficulty of mantaining a single config file for all those hosts. Since each server takes up as much memory running separately as when combined, resources are not saved. This is very different from Apache which could easily run thousands of virtual hosts without increasing memory useage (since is spawned a new process for each request anyway). With the style of virtual hosting in the pre 3.0 series, any change to a virtual server would require a restart of the entire process, bringing down every virtual host in the process. Since each virtual server was initialized separately, the time to restart was proportional to the number of virtual servers.
I don't know what the current situation is with the new implimentation, but if it is the same, I can't see why it would be useful. I believe the config file problems are greatly reduced.
In the mean time several users, including myself, developed virtual hosting using registered filters. This proved to be very efficient, even when written in tcl.
--Tom Jackson
I. To remove yourself from this list:
Send a message to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" with the following text in the BODY of your message:
signoff aolserver
II. For a complete list of listserv options please visit:
http://listserv.aol.com/
III. For more AOLserver information please visit:
http://www.aolserver.com/
