Re: Apache doesn't load anymore modules after mod_perl.so

2002-11-30 Thread Gerald Richter
 it is OK again with 1.99-08:-)
 


Great news! I was just about to try to track it down.

Thanks for the feedback from you both

Gerald




Re: Apache 2?

2002-11-30 Thread Jason Czerak (Jasnik)
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 05:15, Philip Mak wrote:

Is the 'front end' and 'back end' apache servers on the 'same box'?
My problme is that I had one web server. and I did the FE and BE bit (BE
being on the loop back address). to free up some major resources since
mod_perl apache gets huges. I didn't need 20meg process serving up 2K
images :) and had about 20 to 30 smaller apache process doing the
'static' content serving.

I'm currently running Apache2 in a development enviroment. Going to be
upgradeing my web servers with 2.0. Most sites will work nicly.  

I have found that the memory resource problem doesn't excist with 2.0
when you compile with 'worker' or fully threaded.  I'm running 2
processes of apache and each of htem have like 20 threaded. performce
seems good with just running one apache server.  didn't do any real load
testing, but I'm sure 2.0 is going to blow 1.3.x away.

--
Jason



 These days, Apache 2 has become the default version of Apache.
 
 On my site, I run a front end Apache and a back end Apache.
 
 Front end: Apache 1.x, has mod_accel module which is like mod_proxy,
 but downloads all the data from the backend ASAP and frees it up
 immediately, so that a slow modem doesn't tie up the backend
 
 Back end: Apache 1.x with mod_perl
 
 Here's my question:
 
 Is it worth upgrading to Apache 2.x for either the front end or back
 end? And does Apache 2.x's mod_proxy free up the backend ASAP now?
 




Re: Apache 2?

2002-11-30 Thread Philip Mak
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 12:45:50PM -0500, Jason Czerak (Jasnik) wrote:
 Is the 'front end' and 'back end' apache servers on the 'same box'?
 My problme is that I had one web server. and I did the FE and BE bit
 (BE being on the loop back address). to free up some major resources
 since mod_perl apache gets huges. I didn't need 20meg process
 serving up 2K images :) and had about 20 to 30 smaller apache
 process doing the 'static' content serving.

Yes, that's exactly what I do.

 I have found that the memory resource problem doesn't excist with
 2.0 when you compile with 'worker' or fully threaded.  I'm running 2
 processes of apache and each of htem have like 20 threaded.
 performce seems good with just running one apache server.  didn't do
 any real load testing, but I'm sure 2.0 is going to blow 1.3.x away.

Well, there's multiple benefits of running a separate frontend and
backend server:

1. As stated above, the static HTML/GIF/JPG/etc. files don't have to
be served by the heavyweight mod_perl process.

2. If the backend is serving a large file, the frontend can retrieve
the entire file from the backend and free it up immediately, so that a
client with a slow modem will not tie up the backend for the time it
takes to download.

3. If you have different sites (presumably owned by different people)
on your server, all the backend servers can execute with different
userids so that the backend server of one site doesn't have to be able
to read the files of another site. And, everyone can change their own
server configuration.

We know that Apache 2 confers benefit #1 without needing a separate
frontend and backend. Benefit #2 seems to be planned, but isn't here
yet. ...What about benefit #3?



Re: Apache 2?

2002-11-30 Thread Stas Bekman


3. If you have different sites (presumably owned by different people)
on your server, all the backend servers can execute with different
userids so that the backend server of one site doesn't have to be able
to read the files of another site. And, everyone can change their own
server configuration.

We know that Apache 2 confers benefit #1 without needing a separate
frontend and backend. Benefit #2 seems to be planned, but isn't here
yet. ...What about benefit #3?


#3: --with-mpm=perchild

which is a work in progress
http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/perchild.html

notice the new AssignUserID and ChildPerUserID directives which now can 
set different uid/gid for each group of processes/threads.

__
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