The road to v0.10.1 or v0.11
john at keeping.me.uk
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 zx2c4.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:28 PM, John Keeping <john at keeping.me.uk> 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:
if not in cache:
process and exit
and just rely on the web server restarting us.
More information about the CGit