From owner-freebsd-advocacy Fri May 22 22:26:07 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA03895 for freebsd-advocacy-outgoing; Fri, 22 May 1998 22:26:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from osprey.grizzly.com (med.sc.scruznet.com [165.227.115.28]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA03817 for ; Fri, 22 May 1998 22:25:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from markd@Grizzly.COM) Received: (from markd@localhost) by osprey.grizzly.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id WAA03120; Fri, 22 May 1998 22:27:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 22:27:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805230527.WAA03120@osprey.grizzly.com> From: Mark Diekhans To: kriston@ibm.net CC: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: <3626-Sat23May1998005302-0400-kriston@ibm.net> Subject: Re: FreeBSD A Solution For Business References: <01bd85e0$2dccb1c0$f820aace@eliot.pacbell.net> <199805230337.UAA02883@osprey.grizzly.com> <3626-Sat23May1998005302-0400-kriston@ibm.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi Kris, >Mark Diekhans writes: >> >> o A port of Netscape enterprise server would be a plus. Apache is >> good, but there is a perceived need for a threaded server for >> scalability. Maybe more preception than reality. > >With just user-level threads, this isn't going to buy you much. But >that's okay because almost nobody buys multiprocessor Pentium systems >at this moment, so you'll get efficient use of resources in the web >server process. That will change and it would help to have >kernel-level threads to take advantage of the extra processor(s) if >that web server were threaded; until then fork/exec is better for >multiprocessor systems -- at least the way I understand it. The rational here is that user-level threads eliminate much of the process context switching overhead. Not having seen or done performance measurements, I can't say if its significant to a http server or not, I discussed it with people in charge of selecting systems who felt a threaded server was required (but then again, they didn't have any measurements to back it up). Personally, I would just add another pentium running apache if the first one got bogged down. Mark To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message