apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@attglobal.net>
Subject Re: [Request for comments] new poll API
Date Mon, 29 Jul 2002 14:34:12 GMT
"Ryan Bloom" <rbb@covalent.net> writes:

> > From: trawick@rdu88-250-182.nc.rr.com [mailto:trawick@rdu88-250-
> > 
> > Brian Pane <brianp@apache.org> writes:
> > 
> > > To continue the recent discussions on the problems in the current
> > > apr_poll API, here's a patch for apr_poll.h that illustrates my
> > > proposed fix.
> > >
> > > What I'm proposing here is to split the API into two parts:
> > >
> > >   - A lightweight, single-function poll API for use (only!)
> > >     with very small sets of descriptors.
> > 
> > Do we really need this API?  What is the sort of APR application for
> > which the heavy-duty API is harmful?
> 
> I am biting my tongue here, but Jeff, you are the person who
> specifically stated that the heavy-duty API was too slow for us to use.

I said it was too slow and/or cumbersome to use in a particular
situation that does not correspond to something an APR app would do,
so I don't consider that a valid use-case for justifying the simpler
API.  (An APR app should be using an APR timeout socket option for
that situation.)

Like I said above, I'd first like to see a description of an APR app
that is harmed by doing the setup and using the accessor functions.
This should be helpful in determining how important it is to support
the simpler API flavor.

-- 
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net
Born in Roswell... married an alien...

Mime
View raw message