Keep Server Online
If you find the Apache Lounge, the downloads and overall help useful, please express your satisfaction with a donation.
or
A donation makes a contribution towards the costs, the time and effort that's going in this site and building.
Thank You! Steffen
Your donations will help to keep this site alive and well, and continuing building binaries. Apache Lounge is not sponsored.
| |
|
Topic: two httpd processes starting up |
|
Author |
|
twelvenine
Joined: 20 Jun 2007 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Wed 20 Jun '07 19:57 Post subject: two httpd processes starting up |
|
|
i've just installed apache 2.4 on a winxp machine. it works, but when i start httpd, two httpd.exe processes start up according to the task manager. in my experience only one daemon is needed, in fact i can kill one of them and the server will still work. are there supposed to be two httpd processes or is something wrong? |
|
Back to top |
|
tdonovan Moderator
Joined: 17 Dec 2005 Posts: 611 Location: Milford, MA, USA
|
Posted: Wed 20 Jun '07 22:58 Post subject: |
|
|
I expect you mean Apache 2.2.4 - Apache 2.4 is probably still a few years in the future.
Yes, it is correct to have two httpd processes on Windows.
The first httpd process (...call it A...) checks the configuration, then starts the second httpd process (...call it B...).
B serves all the web requests.
After a few requests, B always shows greater memory use than A in Task Manager - so that's how you can tell them apart.
While Apache is running, A just monitors B.
If B dissappears (because of a failure), A starts a new B to continue serving requests.
The only other job for A is to shutdown B when you intentionally stop Apache.
The memory use shown in Task Manager for these two processes can be misleading because much of this memory is shared between the two processes.
For example: if your two httpd processes show 21mb and 13mb respectively, you might notice that your free memory only decreased by 24mb total when you started up Apache. This is because approx 10mb of this memory is common to both processes, so this scheme is not as inefficient as it looks in Task Manager.
-tom- |
|
Back to top |
|
twelvenine
Joined: 20 Jun 2007 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Thu 21 Jun '07 6:20 Post subject: |
|
|
yeah, i meant 2.2.4. thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
Jorge
Joined: 12 Mar 2006 Posts: 376 Location: Belgium
|
Posted: Thu 21 Jun '07 9:26 Post subject: |
|
|
tdonovan wrote: | I expect you mean Apache 2.2.4 - Apache 2.4 is probably still a few years in the future.
|
Not really, they always go in even numbers
2.0 -> production
2.1 -> dev trunk
2.2 -> rebranded 2.1 when ready for production
2.3 -> current dev trunk
2.4 -> rebranded 2.3 when it is ready for production |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|