> > On Wed, Dec 22, 1999 at 05:58:16PM -0600, Dwayne C . Litzenberger wrote:
> > > Does someone have Linus's take on why on earth he let something that
> > > should definitely be in user-space (the httpd) into the kernel? It seems
> > > absurd to me, and odd that Linus would allow it.
> >
> > Performance. The apache/khttpd combo beats the shit out of NT in most
> > benchmarks.
> >
>
> Performance, and *modularity*. khttpd doesn't affect anything else in
> the kernel, and so is a rather harmless optional feature.
Compare HTTP ( static ) to NFS, coda or some other network FS.
There is something to be said about in favour of pushing "files" with a FS
like implementation of the HTTP protocol.
If we 're looking at it that way, running it in kernelspace is a lot
faster then having some daemon doing this for us.
However, what we should prevent, is using the kernel for serverside
included garbage and scary scripts, the way a certain webserver from
Redmond (WA) does it. (Brrr... shivers )
The way I see it, using a modular approach to allow optional features to
run in kernel space is a good way to ensure compatibility and performance
for all apps running on Linux.
By "allowing" these things that only are used by a few percent of Linux
users into the mainstream kernel, compatibility and performance are
promoted, at the cost of larger kernelsource.
You can't bake an omelette without breaking eggs.
The real question is, do we NEED it, or is it there only to fight the FUD
thrown at us from Redmond?
Okay.. those were my 2C on the subject.
Regards, happy holidays,
---------------------------draw-conclusion-here------------------------
Homme R. Bitter *NIX admin, BOFH, MCSE, parttime divine entity.
REM This is a comment, I realy, really, really love comments.
-
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/