First off, the complaint about the lack of documentation for DSO being
experimental is a bit offbase IMO.  It isn't up to the mod_perl group to
make sure RedHat includes complete documentation in their build of
mod_perl.

Also, this issue has been talked about many times on this mailing list.  
Sometime after mod_perl 1.20 was released there was talk that the DSO
problems had been fixed.  I can remember putting out a post myself on
exactly how to cause the process size to grow using HUP or USR1 when using
mod_perl 1.21 and 1.22-dev in order to disprove this.  It is always best
to check one of the archives first for this kind of problem IMO.

I find it best to do a daily staggered shutdown/restart of each apache
server and rotate the logs via a custom script.  One minute of downtime
per server per day isn't exactly noticeable when you have a load balancing
system set up.  

On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Buddy Lee Haystack wrote:

> 
> Thanks, but as a RedHat [or other typical major distribution] user, I
> would never see the documentation you mentioned below. Since DSO is
> still experimental, would it not be an absolute necessity to include
> that information in the location where most users are directed to look
> for information about all things Apache? The first place I go to look
> for information is on the online documentation, and I know that the
> "experimental" nature of using DSO is not mentioned anywhere in
> "Apache 1.3 Dynamic Shared Object (DSO)
> Support" [http://www.apache.org/docs/dso.html].
> 
> It appears as if the "experimental" nature of DSO's under Apache is
> fairly well removed from view.
> 
> Had the information you included below been clearly listed on Apache's
> website, in the proper location, many people would have made a choice
> not to use DSO. It appears as if the Apache Group has been a little
> less than candid in Apache's true support for DSO.
> 
> IMHO There really needs to be a warning in the documentation on their
> website explicitly stating the info you've included below.
> 
<snip>

-- 
<Douglas Leonard>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Reply via email to