howard chen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Eric Covener <covener@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Bizarre conclusion. Other interpreters are likely more >> thread-aware/thread-exploitative when not embedded in Apache, so >> they'd be less likely to casually link with non-threadsafe libraries. >> > > Why? Since if mod_php has thread safety problem with Apache2 worker > MPM, mod_python/mod_ruby should also have these problem, isn't? > > Othwsie, it is the PHP team over worry about the problem? Agreed. This is the standard PHP team FUD that they don't grok threading and don't have the capacity to determine which libraries are thread safe (and under what conditions). It's 2009, so I don't expect this to change before PHP ceases to be relevant. FWIW, in most applications it's thread safety is just fine. But this can't be said if Apache ever becomes free-threaded, as opposed to just threaded on a dedicated worker - too many cases where TLS is used in the various libs that rely on a task not jumping threads. There's also little guarantee that multiple PHP interpreters can exist on a thread, e.g. if the filter + handler are both used. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project. See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info. To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|