On 8/12/05, Brian J. France <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see the code for SO_LINGER in apr_socket_opt_set, but I don't see any
> place in the server code that calls apr_socket_opt_set with
> APR_SO_LINGER.
I stand corrected. I should have used gdb and tested that before I
posted. So they put cod
On Aug 12, 2005, at 10:52 AM, steve roussey wrote:
On 8/12/05, Brian J. France <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Really? We just did a around of discussion/debugging on this at work
and I found that it uses ap_lingering_close which is like the
lingering_close function in 1.3.
:)
Yes, it does do ap
On 8/12/05, Brian J. France <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Really? We just did a around of discussion/debugging on this at work
> and I found that it uses ap_lingering_close which is like the
> lingering_close function in 1.3.
:)
Yes, it does do ap_lingering_close, and it sets SO_LINGER. I have no
srclib/apr/network_io/unix/sockopt.c:if
(setsockopt(sock->socketdes, SOL_SOCKET, SO_LINGER, (char *) &li,
sizeof(struct linger)) == -1)
...
It gets set if APR_SO_LINGER, is set which it is:
srclib/apr/include/apr_network_io.h:#define APR_SO_LINGER1
/**< Linger */
and if
On Aug 11, 2005, at 7:48 PM, steve roussey wrote:
o Apache 2+ uses SO_LINGER by default if it defined for that system.
Really? We just did a around of discussion/debugging on this at work
and I found that it uses ap_lingering_close which is like the
lingering_close function in 1.3.
Apache
On 8/12/05, steve roussey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just a couple last notes on lingering:
>
> o Apache 2+ uses SO_LINGER by default if it defined for that system.
> Apache 1 will only use it if you define USE_SO_LINGER (I suppose in
> configure). Apache2 has all sorts of stuff in the comments
Yes, you are quite correct in that a very large site (Yahoo, Google,
etc) will use a caching ISP (aka Akami). In fact, I imagine that it
would be a completely separate domain name so there would be no
cookies and everyone down the chain can easily cache the content as
well. Doesn't work for all obj
Yes, thanks! Hopefully by next week I'll have learned how to set
FastCGI up securely and with a php opcode accelerator active. Then
I'll give it some time and return with results.
On 8/11/05, Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> Will be interested to see your results. As I ment
steve roussey wrote:
> This actually sounds like an argument for NOT using mod_php. It sounds
> like an argument for using Apache2 or lighttpd or xyz in conjection
> with FastCGI. (Or a proxy arangement, which I've done, though in my
> personal case, I like to get the same scaling with less machine
Hi Steve,
Will be interested to see your results. As I mentioned earlier, I believe
you'll find FastCGI quite convenient in your case.
Andi
At 05:48 PM 8/11/2005 -0700, steve roussey wrote:
Just a couple last notes on lingering:
o Apache 2+ uses SO_LINGER by default if it defined for that s
Just a couple last notes on lingering:
o Apache 2+ uses SO_LINGER by default if it defined for that system.
Apache 1 will only use it if you define USE_SO_LINGER (I suppose in
configure). Apache2 has all sorts of stuff in the comments of the code
and in the manual which is just wrong. Its all fro
Yep and it works great.
At 07:34 AM 8/10/2005 +0200, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
steve roussey schrieb:
> I'm assuming that the 4.3.0 Release Announcement that FastCGI
> was removed is bogus or reversed.
It was merged into the CGI SAPI module.
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://w
steve roussey schrieb:
> I'm assuming that the 4.3.0 Release Announcement that FastCGI
> was removed is bogus or reversed.
It was merged into the CGI SAPI module.
--
Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6
steve roussey wrote:
> On 8/9/05, Rasmus Lerdorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>PHP by default compiles as a non-pic shared library now which is just as
>>fast as a static build inside Apache since it is the pic stuff that
>>slows down a DSO. So there is really no need for static builds anymore,
On 8/9/05, Rasmus Lerdorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PHP by default compiles as a non-pic shared library now which is just as
> fast as a static build inside Apache since it is the pic stuff that
> slows down a DSO. So there is really no need for static builds anymore,
> unless you happen to be
That is great to know. In that case, I won't worry about threading
again. I'm assuming that the 4.3.0 Release Announcement that FastCGI
was removed is bogus or reversed.
Unfortunately my source for mysql connection pooling was never
upgraded to support 4.1's APIs. If anyone knows one, pass it by m
Hi Steve,
From my experiences, FastCGI performance is comparable to mod_php.
Andi
At 02:24 PM 8/9/2005 -0700, steve roussey wrote:
On 8/9/05, Andreas Korthaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By using lighttpd with fastcgi we seperate the webserver process from
> php processes (which could even wo
steve roussey wrote:
> On 8/9/05, Andreas Korthaus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>By using lighttpd with fastcgi we seperate the webserver process from
>>php processes (which could even work on other machines)...
>
>
> Someone else emailed me about using FastCGI with Apache 2.1/event but
> I jus
18 matches
Mail list logo
