apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bojan Smojver" <bo...@rexursive.com>
Subject Re: Changing the order of cleanup for some core objects
Date Wed, 23 Jul 2008 11:33:52 GMT
Quoting "Mladen Turk" <mturk@apache.org>:

> With Joe's proposal the additional pool for reslist and the
> single cleanup registered there is actually the pre_cleanup,
> so why not using that? We'll preserve 8K of memory to the user
> simply by using that.

I'll try to summarise like this:

- pre_cleanup was invented to address resources that allocate their  
own pools, but without ugly hacks (current reslist worked fine for the  
ones that don't)

- this changed original behaviour somewhat, so the API is no longer  
exactly the same

With both of the above in mind, I'd say making current reslist  
behaviour different may have undesirable consequences, so it probably  
cannot be done on the stable branch (you noted that yourself), which  
is for the life of 1.x. Not good.

Joe's approach can be a whole new thing for people that need per  
resource pools, but with a typical APR design pattern.

But, I could be completely wrong about all this. So, the more input we  
can get from the list, the better. Any which way we choose to go, I'll  
help with testing.

PS. As I said before, I'd even be happy with that 3-way  
apr_reslist_create_ex() approach, so that people can choose what they  
really like.


View raw message