On Sat, 6 May 2000, Greg Cope wrote:
: But you will be not able to tune the two types of the threads to have
: different Apache parameters (MaxRequests and others) so I'm not sure
you
: will get rid of the dual setup, unless these will be taken care of by
: mod_perl.
:
: well,
: But you will be not able to tune the two types of the threads to have
: different Apache parameters (MaxRequests and others) so I'm not sure
you
: will get rid of the dual setup, unless these will be taken care of by
: mod_perl.
:
: well, there is a PerlInterpMaxRequests parameter in
On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Stas Bekman wrote:
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Doug MacEachern wrote:
On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Greg Cope wrote:
Does this mean that we {will|may} be able to use the interpreter pool to
set up X Perl interpreters (say 20 to service dynamic handlers) with Z
apache (say
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Doug MacEachern wrote:
On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Greg Cope wrote:
Does this mean that we {will|may} be able to use the interpreter pool to
set up X Perl interpreters (say 20 to service dynamic handlers) with Z
apache (say 60 to handle static + dynamic content -
On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Greg Cope wrote:
Does this mean that we {will|may} be able to use the interpreter pool to
set up X Perl interpreters (say 20 to service dynamic handlers) with Z
apache (say 60 to handle static + dynamic content - assuming the dynamic
content is passed to the Perl
I though the new apache model was a hybrid were there were preforked
children that then used threads - have I missed the plot here ?
Yes, you can configure any combination. See Erics mails on the "RE: mod_perl
2.x/perl 5.6.x ?" for a list of possible combinations.
Gerald
- Original Message -
From: "Gerald Richter" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Greg Cope" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 April 2000 13:46
Subject: RE: mod_perl-1.99_01-dev [ - possibly OT ]
I though the new apache model was a hybrid were there were
- Original Message -
From: "Gerald Richter" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Greg Cope" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 22 April 2000 13:36
Subject: RE: mod_perl-1.99_01-dev
Does this mean that we {will|may} be able to use the interpreter pool
to
set up X Pe
On Thu, 20 Apr 2000, Doug MacEachern wrote:
eric and stas already let the cat out of the bag, but i was planning to
give a summary of what's in progress for mod_perl-2.0 anyhow :)
i've included a summary of the pieces i'm currently working on, there's a
great deal left to do, but it's
On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Doug MacEachern wrote:
One thing you failed to mention was backward compatibility - what is your
intention with regard to that?
apache-2.0+ and Perl 5.6.0+ are required for mod_perl-2.0
if you want backward compatibility with older Apache/Perls,
just use
I should have been more clear!
nah, i realized right after i turned off my laptop, it was like 3am, i was
dum.
I meant backward compatibility to the mod_perl API. Will I be able to take
a module that makes extensive use of Apache::* mod_perl core modules, and
expect it to work?
yes, the
11 matches
Mail list logo
