Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 30 Oct 2000 07:29:51 +0100 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of lock_kernel()?(Was: |
| |
On Sun, Oct 29, 2000 at 11:45:49AM -0800, dean gaudet wrote: > On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > The big question is: why is Apache using file locking so > > > much? Is this normal behaviour for Apache? > > > > Apache uses file locking to serialize accept on hosts where accept either has > > bad thundering heard problems or was simply broken with multiple acceptors > > if apache 1.3 is compiled with -DSINGLE_LISTEN_UNSERIALIZED_ACCEPT it'll > avoid the fcntl() serialisation when there is only one listening port. > (it still uses it for multiple listeners... you can read all about my > logic for that at <http://www.apache.org/docs/misc/perf-tuning.html>.) > > is it appropriate for this to be defined for newer linux kernels? i > haven't kept track, sorry. tell me what versions to conditionalize it on.
It should not be needed anymore for 2.4, because the accept() wakeup has been fixed.
-Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |