From dev-return-5014-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Tue Dec 04 00:38:57 2001 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 18155 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2001 00:38:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 18144 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2001 00:38:57 -0000 Subject: Re: Pool Patches Compared From: Ian Holsman To: Ian Holsman Cc: dev@apr.apache.org In-Reply-To: <3C083414.1080208@cnet.com> References: <3C083414.1080208@cnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0 (Preview Release) Date: 03 Dec 2001 16:39:03 -0800 Message-Id: <1007426343.19649.12.camel@griffon.nasa.cnet.cnwk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Fri, 2001-11-30 at 17:36, Ian Holsman wrote: > Both Brian's & Sander's most recent patches are compared. > http://webperf.org/a2/v30/ > > results.. > both are better than what we have. > Sander's is significantly better at one, > and Brian's better at the other. Brian pointed out that the network was getting maxxed. I'll try to re-run sanders and brian's latest version tonight on smaller files > > ..Ian