The road to v0.10.1 or v0.11

John Keeping john at
Fri Jan 17 18:38:59 CET 2014

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 06:09:15PM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason at> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:28 PM, John Keeping <john at> wrote:
> >> I really can't see this being sensible without moving to libgit2.  As
> >> long as we stick with libgit.a then we need to fork for each request so
> >> I'm not sure there's much benefit to supporting FastCGI without moving
> >> to something that lets us free resources when we're done processing a
> >> request.
> >
> > The advantage would be not having to reparse the config and scan for
> > repos on every.single.solitary.request.
> Oh, and we could avoid a fork() for cached pages...

Good point.  I think that probably does make it worthwhile.

It may even make sense for a FastCGI process to do:

    while read_request
        if not in cache:
            process and exit

and just rely on the web server restarting us.

More information about the CGit mailing list