[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       apache-httpd-users
Subject:    Re: [users@httpd] small binary - more LoadModules or?
From:       Joshua Slive <jslive () gmail ! com>
Date:       2004-07-29 21:04:06
Message-ID: e498c16604072914045cce6a56 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 10:50:17 -0700, Erin O'Neill <eon@stanford.edu> wrote:
> Is it better (ie. performance, stability) to have a small Apache 2 binary (
> with just core.c, prefork.c, http_core.c, mod_so.c) and load the modules
> you need. Or should certain modules be built in (like mod_ssl or mod_cgi or
> mod_auth???). and if so which modules should be built in and which loaded??

For exactly the same set of modules, there will be almost no
difference between statically and dynamically compiled apache.  They
will both use the same amount of memory.

If anything, however, the dynamically loaded version will be slower. 
On some systems there is a very small overhead to calling functions
not included in the binary.  But you almost surely won't notice.  (You
can also decrease memory usage very slightly by chaninge the
DYNAMIC_MODULE_LIMIT to zero when compiling apache, if I remember
correctly.

Joshua.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
   "   from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]