On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 10:37:07PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 06:00:47PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 05:25:07PM +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
> > > > This has all sorts of consequences, the most annoying of which is that
> > > > both "stop" and "graceful-stop" actually won't kill CGI processes when
> > > > using a threaded MPM/cgid.
> > >
> > > So is mod_cgid still the default CGI module for worker because there
> > > once existed some ye-olde-Unixes which had an "interesting" fork()
> > > implementation? Given that POSIX has mandated since 2001 or whatever
> > > that fork() duplicates only the calling thread, is there any
> > > disadvantage to using mod_cgi in all MPMs on modern platforms?
> >
> > Can't think of any, and performance is easy to measure.
>
> Just some comparitive ab's, all with Linux 2.6.13, NPTL,
>
> ab -n 5000 -c 10 http://localhost/cgi-bin/test-cgi
>
>
> MPM cgid cgi
>
> worker 594.28 588.69 req/sec.
>
> event 665.11 661.28 req/sec.
>
> leader 598.14 592.86 req/sec.
>
> threadpool 594.94 591.87 req/sec.
>
> There seems to be a very consistent .1% advantage to using mod_cgid, for
> me at least. Of course, cgid eats a process table entry and some memory,
> but fork()'ing a plain process does seem to be less overhead.
>
> --
> Colm MacC�rthaigh Public Key: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
