jesus at omniti
Nov 10, 2003, 7:08 PM
Post #2 of 2
(5975 views)
Permalink
|
On Nov 10, 2003, at 4:32 PM, Mark Bainter wrote:
> So, from reading past posts, mod_backhand apparently doesn't work
> with apache2. However, it seems like most of the posts mention
> it doesn't work with some of the changes. There particularly
> seems to be some concern about the new threaded MPM.
>
> So I am wondering, if that's the problem, does it work alright if
> you're still using the standard prefork MPM?
while I am sure there are no huge technical obstacles to porting
mod_backhand to use Apache2 constraining it to the preform MPM. But,
if you are going to limit it yourself to prefork, why use Apache2 at
all?
mod_backhand needs a good and complete overhaul to work correctly under
Apache 2. There is no reason that mod_backhand should be ported
directly. It is the original implementation of the module and just as
most software projects, a complete refactoring for v2 is warranted.
90% of the code logic can be completely removed from mod_backhand in
apache2. The resource information collection program should be
implemented as a standalone service using something like libgtop (but
not libgtop because of its restrictive license). The connection
proxying code should be delegated to the mod_proxy module. That leaves
on the decision making algorithms -- a lot less to break and a lot less
to maintain.
I don't have the free time to develop this at the moment, but I would
be happy to offer guidance and code-review for anyone who wants to take
on the project.
// Theo Schlossnagle
// Principal Engineer -- http://www.omniti.com/~jesus/
// Postal Engine -- http://www.postalengine.com/
// Ecelerity: fastest MTA on earth
|
