Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?= Newsgroups: comp.os.vms Subject: Re: Apache + mod_php performance Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 19:15:40 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 21 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 01:15:41 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1c0eb99617403d5d511f3f96ce19037b"; logging-data="442560"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19sfAlazG1XRZtQwiTp2K6Ao9Jet9e+s4E=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:GpGOyYUcuZRQks8B1saOXLdnn1w= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 1889 On 9/26/2024 4:40 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 09:44:14 -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote: >> Whoever invented the term apparently thought fork() was the only >> way to create a subprocess. > > It is the most natural way in this case, because it creates a complete > copy of the parent process, which is what you want. > >> On VMS it will obviously use LIB$SPAWN or SYS$CREPRC. > > Not only is that more expensive, it also requires additional setup to > recreate the effect of fork(2). They have one big advantage over fork on VMS. They exist! :-) Arne