Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 15:30:25 +0200 From: "Karsten W. Rohrbach" <karsten@rohrbach.de> To: Calvin NG <calvinng@brel.com> Cc: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: building apache from /usr/ports Message-ID: <20010606153025.B19526@mail.webmonster.de> In-Reply-To: <20010606113119.B54034@brel.com>; from calvinng@brel.com on Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 11:31:19AM %2B0800 References: <JBEOKPCEMKJLMJAKBECCMELDDAAA.jwatkins@firstplan.com> <20010605140629.B15206@leviathan.inethouston.net> <20010605152718.A21889@localhost> <20010606034917.D97958@mail.webmonster.de> <15133.37451.23934.758674@guru.mired.org> <20010606113119.B54034@brel.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Calvin NG(calvinng@brel.com)@2001.06.06 11:31:19 +0000: > Greetings, >=20 > Correct me if I m wrong. > For in-core web server , every copy of server loaded has the perl and/o= r php > in it. For modules, its a shared library, the server is smaller size, = and only > a copy of the module is loaded in memory. >=20 > However, in-core is slightly faster then modules, IIRC.=20 >=20 > I remember reading the performance pages of mod_perl, they recommend ru= nning > mod_perl in-core servers separately as a application server. >=20 > Thats my understanding of the difference between in-core and modules. i think this is correct. /k >=20 > Regards, > /calvin >=20 > lines with :> are quotes from Mike Meyer's email > :> Karsten W. Rohrbach <karsten@rohrbach.de> types: > :> > you won't recognize it until you have to implement a heavily loaded > :> > server with php or perl in-core. position independent code is know t= o be > :> > slower, but it outperforms monolithic compiles by saving a lot of ra= m. > :>=20 > :> Ok, where does the savings come from? You get one copy of the code, > :> shared by all the processes running the binary, whether or not the > :> code is in a shared library. COW for data should mean that data should > :> be shared pretty much the same. So what have I missed? > :>=20 > :> Thanx, > :> <mike > :> -- >=20 --=20 > In protocol design, perfection has been reached not when there is nothing > left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.=20 > --Networking truth #12, Ross Callon, RFC 1925=20 KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.n= et/ karsten&rohrbach.de -- alpha&ngenn.net -- alpha&scene.org -- catch@spam.de GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 B= F46 --rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7HjBxM0BPTilkv0YRAsUOAJ9TlSiJnBy7CFrVDZzDR9xr37cy4gCffNOA l5ycxvcDgcm+82izjr3YVP0= =wTaR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rS8CxjVDS/+yyDmU-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010606153025.B19526>