Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-07-18 Thread Tony Finch
Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >The easiest way would be to have thttpd fork after listening a >pre-determined amount of servers, then they'll all compete calling >accept() to grab connections. This is exactly what we did at Demon, which was for a long time the largest thttpd insta

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-23 Thread Anders Nordby
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 08:55:55PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: >>> http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/thttpd-2.19+kq.patch >> Commit them to the port! :-) > Yeah, I should. I should also submit them back to the author :-) And the poor port maintainer for review first please. :-) But anyway, thttpd

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-22 Thread David O'Brien
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:19:02PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/thttpd-2.19+kq.patch Commit them to the port! :-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-22 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 07:42:26PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:19:02PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/thttpd-2.19+kq.patch > > Commit them to the port! :-) Yeah, I should. I should also submit them back to the author :-) Kris PGP s

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-22 Thread Mike Silbersack
On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 07:42:26PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 21, 2001 at 03:19:02PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/thttpd-2.19+kq.patch > > > > Commit them to the port! :-) > > Yeah, I should. I sho

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-21 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 04:44:02AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > .) kqueue. http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/thttpd-2.19+kq.patch Kris PGP signature

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-21 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Zach Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010421 08:03] wrote: > > > or so the numbers have lead me to beleive. Its still an annoying > > > design, but has someone come up with real numbers to show that accept() > > > hurding is a problem for waiters that do real work after accept() ? > > > > Accept her

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-21 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Zach Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010421 06:47] wrote: > [apologies for missing the original post and replying to a reply..] > > > > - A round-robin token-passing scheme to determine which process gets > > > to do the accept(). Turns out it's very bad to just have all the > > > process

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-20 Thread Jef Poskanzer
>> sendfile() probably doesn't make sense in a non-blocking server - wouldn't >> it block until the entire file is sent? I do plan to use it in my >> other server mini_httpd. > >Yes and no, the sendfile can block until all the file is sent, >however if the socket is in non-block mode it will abor

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-20 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Jef Poskanzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010420 09:11] wrote: > The accept-filters change is already on my short list to add. I'll > probably use your version. > > sendfile() probably doesn't make sense in a non-blocking server - wouldn't > it block until the entire file is sent? I do plan to use i

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-20 Thread Jef Poskanzer
The accept-filters change is already on my short list to add. I'll probably use your version. sendfile() probably doesn't make sense in a non-blocking server - wouldn't it block until the entire file is sent? I do plan to use it in my other server mini_httpd. As for making thttpd use multiple

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-20 Thread Alfred Perlstein
cc'd the author... * [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010420 05:11] wrote: > > Second, it looks like there's a few things in thttpd that could be > > optimized further. > ... > > .) pre-forking, this would help with stalling on disk IO. > > Since the author of thttpd makes a point of *not*

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-20 Thread Adrian Chadd
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010420 02:47] wrote: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/thttpd/thttpd-sendfile-acceptfilter.diff > > > > foo. :) > > First off the initial patch I put up was broken, but it now seems to > work, so if you'v

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-20 Thread sthaug
> Second, it looks like there's a few things in thttpd that could be > optimized further. ... > .) pre-forking, this would help with stalling on disk IO. Since the author of thttpd makes a point of *not* using pre-forking (and thttpd still being very fast), I'm not sure that pre-forking patches w

Re: thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-20 Thread Alfred Perlstein
* Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010420 02:47] wrote: > http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/thttpd/thttpd-sendfile-acceptfilter.diff > > foo. :) First off the initial patch I put up was broken, but it now seems to work, so if you've downloaded it you might want to make sure you got the righ

thttpd hack for sendfile and accept filters.

2001-04-20 Thread Alfred Perlstein
http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/thttpd/thttpd-sendfile-acceptfilter.diff foo. :) -- -Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] http://www.egr.unlv.edu/~slumos/on-netbsd.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message