On 4/13/05, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
Hi,
I originally posted this feature request to the bug tracker, but Joe
Orton suggested it'd post it here instead, so here it is.
I'd like to see a new 'MPM' that basically works like this:
A single or
Why have a separate 'frontend' and 'backend'?
One of these days when I get some spare time, I plan on rewriting
mpm_winnt to use a small pool of threads which will use unbuffered zero
copy overlapped IO and an IO completion port as the notification
mechanism. The pool of worker threads will
On 5/10/05, Phillip Susi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why have a separate 'frontend' and 'backend'?
Because for example PHP is not thread-safe and PHP may (easily) crash
(and you don't wish to allow that to crash the entire server).
Or because you wish to run one backend as user A and another
On 4/13/05, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
Hi,
I originally posted this feature request to the bug tracker, but Joe
Orton suggested it'd post it here instead, so here it is.
I'd like to see a new 'MPM' that basically works like this:
A single or
Hi,
I originally posted this feature request to the bug tracker, but Joe
Orton suggested it'd post it here instead, so here it is.
I'd like to see a new 'MPM' that basically works like this:
A single or few-threaded, non-blocking frontend that accepts incoming
connections, receives requests and
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
Hi,
I originally posted this feature request to the bug tracker, but Joe
Orton suggested it'd post it here instead, so here it is.
I'd like to see a new 'MPM' that basically works like this:
A single or few-threaded, non-blocking frontend that accepts incoming
