Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Feb 2002 09:51:16 +0100
From:      "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com>
To:        "Terry Lambert" <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        "FreeBSD Questions" <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: in-kernel HTTP Server for FreeBSD?
Message-ID:  <001c01c1b859$6ee18c80$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
References:  <20020217143343.41758.qmail@web21104.mail.yahoo.com> <xzp4rkgf7n7.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20020217163045.GB90303@voi.aagh.net> <3C703089.AD03554B@mindspring.com> <018501c1b816$2a9cb970$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C705564.E1EA2FDA@mindspring.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry writes:

> This is the third list on which you've made bald
> statements as if they were facts.
>
> Do I need to filter you on this list, too?

Please do, if you intend to start your posts with personal attacks.

> The obvious rejoinder to your claim is that on
> a resource starved system that is using HTTP
> based system management, once you hit resource
> starvation, your management of the system which
> would enable you to recover from the failure
> situation is impossible, unless that management
> is immune from said stavation (e.g. by being in
> the kernel).

HTTP-based system management is an unnecessary gadget.  A simple terminal
session is more efficient and reliable.  I've never cared for anything that
must be managed via HTTP.  That's one reason why I don't like IIS.

> Finally, yes, it makes sense for a dedicated
> web server to do this; so what?  It also make
> sense for any web server where performance is
> an issue, dedicated or not.

No.  If the machine is not dedicated to HTTP, putting such functions in the
kernel unnecessarily complicates and destabilizes the kernel.  In fact, it
defeats the whole purpose of an operating system.  The OS is supposed to
handle essential functions common to all users and affecting the entire
system; user processes are supposed to handle applications specific to a
user or users.  When OS designers work to improve stability or security,
they tend to move more and more code out into userland; when they work to
get the highest possible score on a benchmark in order to please the
marketroids, they move code into the kernel.

> PS: People use FreeBSD for dedicated web servers;
> therefore, even if your limitation argument were
> valid, which I don't grant, it makes sense for
> FreeBSD to at least have this facility available.

People use FreeBSD for dedicated routers, too; so by your logic, presumably
all network and routing daemons should be moved into the kernel as well.

If a user needs a dedicated web server, he should consider something other
than a general-purpose operating system.  Additionally, needing a dedicated
server for anything often is an indication of skimping on hardware, and on
that path lies danger, no matter what OS is used.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001c01c1b859$6ee18c80$0a00000a>