Re: Use threaded MPM by default was Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
Joe Orton wrote: On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 12:48:50AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On Saturday, November 6, 2004 8:28 AM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: @@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ +0: BrianP, Aaron (mutex contention is looking better with the latest code, let's continue tuning and testing), rederpj, jim -0: Lars + + pquerna: Do we want to change this for 2.2? Seems reasonable to do so. 2.0 was our first threaded release - making a threaded MPM by default (if available) for 2.2 seems fine by me. -- justin I don't really agree with this. Many third-party modules still aren't thread-safe (and probably quite a few shipped in httpd too e.g. mod_example!). Making worker the default won't solve that, it'll just create a stream of I upgraded to 2.2 and now everything segfaults bug reports and people will stick with 1.3/2.0. 2.2 can be a compelling upgrade without making worker the default. I second that. -- __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Use threaded MPM by default was Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 12:48:50AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On Saturday, November 6, 2004 8:28 AM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: @@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ +0: BrianP, Aaron (mutex contention is looking better with the latest code, let's continue tuning and testing), rederpj, jim -0: Lars + + pquerna: Do we want to change this for 2.2? Seems reasonable to do so. 2.0 was our first threaded release - making a threaded MPM by default (if available) for 2.2 seems fine by me. -- justin I don't really agree with this. Many third-party modules still aren't thread-safe (and probably quite a few shipped in httpd too e.g. mod_example!). Making worker the default won't solve that, it'll just create a stream of I upgraded to 2.2 and now everything segfaults bug reports and people will stick with 1.3/2.0. 2.2 can be a compelling upgrade without making worker the default. joe
Re: Use threaded MPM by default was Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
It's not Linux but here is a piece of information that should help. NetWare is a thread only environment which means that we have been shipping and running all of the standard modules since day one with really no report of any threading related issues. I can't speak for any third party modules out there that may not be thread safe and I understand that Apache for NetWare has nowhere near the number of installations as Linux or others, but our standard modules seem to be doing well from a NetWare point of view. Even on multi-proc machines. Granted we don't normally stress test mod_example ;). Brad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thursday, November 11, 2004 3:38:29 AM On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 12:48:50AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On Saturday, November 6, 2004 8:28 AM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: @@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ +0: BrianP, Aaron (mutex contention is looking better with the latest code, let's continue tuning and testing), rederpj, jim -0: Lars + + pquerna: Do we want to change this for 2.2? Seems reasonable to do so. 2.0 was our first threaded release - making a threaded MPM by default (if available) for 2.2 seems fine by me. -- justin I don't really agree with this. Many third-party modules still aren't thread-safe (and probably quite a few shipped in httpd too e.g. mod_example!). Making worker the default won't solve that, it'll just create a stream of I upgraded to 2.2 and now everything segfaults bug reports and people will stick with 1.3/2.0. 2.2 can be a compelling upgrade without making worker the default. joe
Use threaded MPM by default was Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
--On Saturday, November 6, 2004 8:28 AM + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: @@ -125,6 +125,8 @@ +0: BrianP, Aaron (mutex contention is looking better with the latest code, let's continue tuning and testing), rederpj, jim -0: Lars + + pquerna: Do we want to change this for 2.2? Seems reasonable to do so. 2.0 was our first threaded release - making a threaded MPM by default (if available) for 2.2 seems fine by me. -- justin
Re: Use threaded MPM by default was Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
Seems reasonable to do so. 2.0 was our first threaded release - making a threaded MPM by default (if available) for 2.2 seems fine by me. -- justin agreed :) however, something that I heard recently is that if you specify a threaded MPM on a platform that does not support it, the build process silently switches to prefork (or whatever the default is for the platform, I guess) now, I haven't seen this myself, so I don't want to propagate FUD, but if it's true I might suggest that halting the build process is preferable to switching behind the scenes (or even switching with a little warning) - from a support standpoint, I built apache like this... should tell the truth about the build in question. if I'm off my rocker, well, sorry. I'll buy a round at the hackathon to make up for it :) --Geoff
Re: Use threaded MPM by default was Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 STATUS
On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Geoffrey Young wrote: MPM on a platform that does not support it, the build process silently switches to prefork (or whatever the default is for the platform, I guess) now, I haven't seen this myself, so I don't want to propagate FUD, but if it's true I might suggest that halting the build process is preferable to switching behind the scenes (or even switching with a little warning) - from That does seem to match my memory of the situation, fwiw. I would have no problem with halting the build if they specified --with-threads and none were available, though I would have a problem with halting the build if using a threaded MPM were simply used by default and none were available. --Cliff
