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

Dan Hollis (goemon@sasami.anime.net)
Sun, 20 Jun 1999 14:27:41 -0700 (PDT)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Dan Hollis: "Re: kHTTPd: Good or Bad"
Previous message: Bjorn Wesen: "Re: async sendfile (was: kHTTPd: Good or Bad)"

On Sun, 20 Jun 1999, Zach Brown wrote:
> what happens when we look up and openldap is slow as reported by MS
> benchmarks? INN? sendmail/qmail/postfix?
> the solution is to update the userland daemons to use 'modern' apis and
> methodologies and such, not to punt and put the protocol in the kernel.
> The former is what apache 2.0 will do, I hope.

So where do you draw the line between userspace nfsd and kernelspace
knfsd? How is this any different from khttpd?

*Boggle*.

-Dan

-
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/

Next message: Dan Hollis: "Re: kHTTPd: Good or Bad"
Previous message: Bjorn Wesen: "Re: async sendfile (was: kHTTPd: Good or Bad)"