On Friday 07 September 2001 14:23, Brian Pane wrote:
> The attached patches change the apr_table_t implementation from
> a linear list to a hash table (not an apr_hash_t, though!). With
> this change, I'm seeing a ~3% improvement in throughput when
> delivering a 0-byte file over the loopback on Linux. (I used this
> 0-byte test case to measure the inherent overhead in the httpd, without
> transmission time clouding the results.)
I dislike this. Why are we putting a second hash table into APR? If we want
to use a hash, then ues an apr_hash_t. If apr_hash_t doesn't support something
that we MUST have to do this, then fix apr_hash_t. Having two different hash
alorithms in APR, one of them hidden under a tables API, seems kind of hackish
to me.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
|