apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Bloom <...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: pools and buckets/brigades, WAS: RE: Review of possible replacement for pools
Date Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:30:38 GMT
On Saturday 25 August 2001 11:38, Sander Striker wrote:
> > > Btw, why couldn't we use pools in brigades again?
> >
> > Because of lifetimes.  If you allocate buckets and brigades out of pools,
> > the lifetimes can't change, but bucket lifetimes aren't known at creation
> > time.  And, you can't use the longest possible lifetime, because that
> > would be a leak.
>
> Ah, I suppose associating a pool with a brigade wouldn't work, would it?
> The buckets can move from brigade to brigade?

There is alreadya pool associated with a brigade.  That doesn't get you
anything though.  A bucket needs to be able to move from one brigade
to another.

I have a problem with the original question though.  I don't understand why
anybody is trying to state that if people want to improve the pools code, they
shouldn't, because we use malloc in one place in the code.  People are
free to work on whatever they want.  If somebody wants to remove the malloc
calls from the buckets and bucket brigades, then they can, but that doesn't
mean that everybody has to focus on that.

Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies			rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------

Mime
View raw message