Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Ryan Bloom <rbb@covalent.net>
Reply-To: rbb@covalent.net
Organization: Covalent Technologies
To: Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@ebuilt.com>
Subject: Re: Handholding: shared memory
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 10:56:55 -0700
Cc: Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm>,
	APR Development <dev@apr.apache.org>
References: <3B766937.A93C949D@sharp.fm>
 <0108120900370F.24893@koj.rkbloom.net> <20010813103528.Z1397@ebuilt.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010813103528.Z1397@ebuilt.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <01081310565505.02126@koj.rkbloom.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


++1!  Please commit ASAP.

Ryan

On Monday 13 August 2001 10:35, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2001 at 09:00:37AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > Unix shared memory is all anonymous, it must be created by the parent,
> > and inherited by the child.  Again, when somebody has the time/energy to
> > fix Unix shared memory, this will change.
>
> FWIW, I have an implementation in my tree that doesn't use MM.  The
> only problem is that you can't "free" the individual memory segments
> you retrieve from the alloc call.  You can only free the entire
> segment (the free call is essentially a no-op).  If this is worth
> having, I can post/commit the patch.  It should be equivalent in all
> other aspects to MM.  (Based off the MM code, but I ripped out
> everything we didn't need and I cleaned up the code...)
>
> I don't believe we need to be able to free each block returned from the
> shmem segment, so I don't think this is a big deal though.  Thoughts?
>
> I don't think we need to have memory management in shmem...  -- justin

-- 

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