EXACTLY. Thanks, Justin.
We are not trying to shirk our responsibilities or be lazy about this. But you can't say "my module is so popular that you must account for problems that I introduce into your environment." I'm fine with adding something to our document that says something along the lines of, "if you choose a threaded MPM such as FOO, BAR, or BAZ, then you need to ensure that the third-party modules you choose to use with the web server are thread-safe. Please contact your third-party modules' vendors for more information on their thread-safety." -g On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 10:09:27AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 09:40:06AM -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > thttpd/Zeus/boa/Tux/khttpd for that. All I am after is a simple very > > visible addition to the Apache 2 distribution which explains that the > > threaded mpms may not be suitable for serving up dynamic content due to > > the unknown thread safety of the libraries these dynamic solutions rely > > on. > > And, my point back to you is that should be part of the documentation > of the module NOT of httpd-2.0. Making broad statements that will > confuse our users like "threaded MPMs may not be suitable for serving > up dynamic content" is a ridiculously overbroad and inaccurate > statement. > > A better statement may be: "Some PHP or Perl modules may not > interact well with a threaded MPM in httpd-2.0. Caution is urged > when using a threaded MPM." To me, that totally belongs in the > PHP or Perl documentation. That is a limitation of PHP and mod_perl > not of httpd-2.0. > > That statement doesn't hold for a mod_jk2 (or whatever the latest > httpd-2.0 Tomcat module is). It totally depends on how the 3rd > party module is architected not on the architecture of the web > server itself. -- justin -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
