Re: Why khttpd is a bad idea (was a pointless argument about devfs)

Richard Gooch (rgooch@atnf.csiro.au)
Fri, 18 Jun 1999 21:30:36 +1000

Alan Cox writes:
> > I find khttpd is a reasonable idea. I dont know what youre talking about
> > with "lower performance than a user space httpd",
> > http://www.fenrus.demon.nl/ seems to indicate otherwise -- what
> > performance measurements were you looking at? B)

For the record, I'm with Alan on this one. I'd rather see a more
general interface rather than just khttpd.

> phhttpd.
>
> > Now if you plug khttpd in front of apache the advantages become obvious.
> > Apache isnt exactly a speed demon -- but with khttpd it could be.
>
> Apache 2.0 should be.
>
> BTW: the big issue with khttpd is a lack of genericness. Its a
> single problem single solution piece of code. There are lots and
> lots of equivalent problems and they all boil own to the same thing.

Which is one of my points about devfs: it's a generic solution to a
range of problems.

Regards,

Richard....

-
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/