[Info-vax] Apache + mod_php performance

[Michael S]

On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 23:01:13 -0400
Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:

> On 10/7/2024 4:07 AM, Michael S wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 00:35:36 -0400
> > Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
> >  
> >> On 10/6/2024 11:12 AM, Michael S wrote:  
> >>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 17:43:02 -0000 (UTC)
> >>> cross at spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote:
> >>>  
> >>>> In article <vdp8kn$a67s$1 at dont-email.me>,
> >>>> Dave Froble  <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:  
> >>>>> On 10/3/2024 7:00 PM, Chris Townley wrote:  
> >>>>>> [snip]
> >>>>>> I don't remember George, but we have certainly woken up Dave!
> >>>>>> ;)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> and I am sure the troll is happy...  
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm not sure whether I've been insulted?  
> >>>>
> >>>> I suspect the "troll" reference is to Lawrence.  Sadly, Arne can
> >>>> not help himself when it comes to resisting arguing with that
> >>>> clown.
> >>>>
> >>>> 	- Dan C.
> >>>>  
> >>>
> >>> Troll or not, but the question about ability to pass open TCP
> >>> socket to child process (or, may be, to unrelated process) under
> >>> VMS is a good question.
> >>> As a lurker, I am waiting for the expert answer with interest.
> >>>  
> >>
> >> Well, some of the issue is in the text of the question.  What does
> >> one mean be "pass socket"?
> >>
> >> When creating a socket, one can specify it to be shared.  What I
> >> was doing was passing the information to a worker process, then
> >> letting the worker process open the existing socket.
> >>
> >> So, would that be considered "passing an open socket"?
> >>  
> >
> > Yes, it would be.
> >
> > On Windows one has to go through similar 3-stage procedure:
> >  - [in parent process] acquire magic record from the open socket by
> >    means of WSADuplicateSocket()
> >  - pass the record to child by any of available IPC mechanisms
> >  - [in child process] use magic record to re-open socket with
> > WSASocket()
> >
> > I never had a need of for it in practice. Looking at docs it seems
> > that the procedure above has at least one inconvenient aspect - the
> > target process has to exist at the moment of WSADuplicateSocket()
> > call. Still, I suppose that it's better than nothing.
> >  
> >> I can post some of the development code is anyone is interested.  I
> >> was working on the inter-process communications when I dropped the
> >> project.  I believe I did open the shared socket in the worker
> >> process.
> >>  
> >
> > May be, others are interested in the code.
> > For me, I'd rather read textual description of the procedure and war
> > story of making it work.
> >  
> 
> Actually, simple.
> 
> 1) Create the socket in listener process
> 2) Pass device name to worker process
> 3) Assign a channel to the device in worker process
> 4) deassign the channel in listener process (if desired)
> 

There are few pieces in your simple explanation that I don't understand:
- How does listener get a device name?
- What is "channel"? Is it the same as 'socket'?
- How one "assigns" channel to device? I would guess that device has to
be open before that?
- Is device name of the socket system-global? 
If yes, does it mean that any process in the system that happens to
know a name can open a device and assign it to channel?