On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 23:25:09 +0300
Nadav Har'El wrote:
> The resulting code is ugly, hairy and Unix-only, but it works and
> performance is significantly better than normal mod_cgi for my usecase
> of very large program-generated files. For example, a simple CGI
> generating 512 MB of data took 0
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012, Nadav Har'El wrote about "Re: [users@httpd] mod-cgi reads
entire output into memory...":
> I "almost" have such code, but ran into a mystery - where in the
> request_req can I find the client socket, so I can write to it directly?
> There ar
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012, Nick Kew wrote about "Re: [users@httpd] mod-cgi reads
entire output into memory...":
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:07:23 +0300
> Nadav Har'El wrote:
> > I looked at the httpd code, discovered (if I understand correctly) that
> > 1. As I alread
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:07:23 +0300
Nadav Har'El wrote:
> When I use it in Apache, Apache itself (NOT the CGI process!) grows
> by 512 MB (!). I was really surprised by this, because ideally Apache
> should hardly grow at all, as at most (if at all) it should be reading
> modest-sized buffers from
Hi, It's been 10 years since my last message to this mailing list, and
I'm happy to join it again :-)
I've encountered a surprising phenomenon with Apache's mod-cgi, which
unnecessarily slows it down for huge outputs, and as a "bonus" also
has a bug: taking up huge amounts of memory:
I have a CGI
