lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Why khttpd is a bad idea (was a pointless argument about
   Date: 	Sat, 19 Jun 1999 00:05:44 +0100 (BST)
From: Simon Kenyon <simon@koala.ie>

i thought khttpd was an existance proof and nothing more
shouldn't the debate be about of if, now how?

I believe what khttpd will be great at is a benchmark target. If a
userspace httpd can beat khttpd's numbers, then we know we're on the
right track. Stephen Tweedie was telling me at Usenix about some of the
good work which Zach Brown has been working on. Basically, it uses the
POSIX real-time signals plus O_ASYNC to completely eliminate the
thundering herd problem as well as the need to use poll() or select()
and the overhead engendered by those functions. I think it's a very
promising approach, that may very well be just as fast as khttpd while
still giving all of the flexibility that user-space httpd can offer.

The name of the game here is to be able to smoke Microsoft on its
benchmark numbers while *still* offering as much flexibility as Apache
can offer. The benchmark numbers are to counter Microsoft's FUD. The
power and flexibility is what will make everyone switch. :-)

- Ted

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.064 / U:2.856 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site