apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henry Jen" <henry...@ztune.net>
Subject Re: apr_threadpool bogosity?
Date Sun, 04 May 2008 05:06:00 GMT
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Henry Jen <henryjen@ztune.net> wrote:

> Bill,
>
> Sorry for late reply, I have been overwhelmed by JavaOne preparation.
> I had reviewed the patch and gave my +1, just that I don't have comitter
> access and won't be able to help. There is the other Solaris poll bug fix I
> tried to get it in but no one seems to care even though Paul had say it
> should be committed.
>

One suggested me to point out the Solaris poll patch and Paul's comment, and
hopefully one dear comitter would take action.

The patch is attached to the issue:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43000

Patch is here:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21136

Mails archive related:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/apr-dev/200804.mbox/%3c4805A1A1.3090305@force-elite.com%3e
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/apr-dev/200712.mbox/%3c369011d00712032222p38c14477n1ecf13dbba5abc4@mail.gmail.com%3e

Cheers,
Henry



> I am getting frustrated with APR, to be honest.
>
> Cheers,
> Henry
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:36 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
> wrote:
>
> > William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42889
> > >
> > > which must be committed?
> > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20540
> > > https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20542
> > >
> > > I'm a little disturbed that the 1.3.0 discussion has been going on for
> > > about 2.5 weeks, and I just now noticed this flaw.  Once 1.3 is gone
> > > we can't *fix* the api, and can't expand it until 1.4
> > >
> >
> > More on the topic;
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43876
> >
> > containing threadpool API patches here;
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21378
> >
> > without any closing feedback to Joe Mudd, submitter.
> >
> > The httpd project has a goal to tag on the 7th.  Work backwards, that's
> > a tag here no later than the 4th.  I would hate to pull apr_threadpool,
> > but if it can't be addressed today or tomorrow and some final decisions
> > made on it's initial rollout, I'm tempted that we simply push it to
> > 1.4.0,
> > which would be a shame.
> >
> > Bill
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message