Slashdot: Answers From Planet TUX: Ingo Molnar RespondsJul 20, 2000, 18:50 (1 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Ingo Molnar)
No-Size-Fits-All! An Application-Down Approach for Your Cloud Transformation REGISTER >
"Last Tuesday you asked Ingo Molnar, Red Hat kernel hacker, about the means by which his TUX Web server recently achieved such fantastic results in SpecWeb99 . He was kind enough to respond with at-length answers addressing licensing, the reality of threads under Linux, the realism of benchmarks, and more. Thanks, Ingo!"
"You appear to have take an "architectural" approach to designing TUX, so I have some architectural questions."
"1.The choice of a kernel space implementation is probably going to be a controversial one. You suggest that HTTP is commonly used enough to go in the kernel just as TCP/IP did years ago. What performance or architectural advantages do you see to moving application protocols into the kernel that cannot be achieved in user space?"
"There are various popular ways to create dynamic web content. Encapsulation, security is provided by CGI, various scripting and virtual machine models - unpriviledged/prototype/buggy CGIs are sufficiently isolated both from HTTP protocol details, from the webserving context, from the web-client and from each other."
"But all CGI/scripting/virtual-machine models (including fast-CGI) lack the possibility of performing with 'maximum performance' if the webserver is in another process context. 'maximum performance' means that there should be only one context running (no context switching done), and the application writer should have the freedom to use C code, or even assembly code. (not that using assembly in web-applications would be too common.)"
0 Talkback[s] (click to add your comment)