apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Querna <c...@force-elite.com>
Subject Re: On to APR 2.0.0? Beyond 9x/ME
Date Sun, 15 Feb 2009 22:48:08 GMT
Branko ─îibej wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> Branko ─îibej wrote:
>>   
>>> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>>     
>>>> 3. make pools runtime-configurable whether they are just a thin
>>>> malloc()/free() wrapper or do internal reuse
>>>>   
>>>>       
>>> I think there may be some interest in this ... we've learned the hard
>>> way that pools as they stand today, while moderately nice for stateless
>>> server implementations, are less than moderately horrible for anything else.
>>>     
>> Nonsense ;-)  It's just a matter of applying the right scope to the right
>> objects, and this is far simpler than anticipating when individual byte
>> allocations are free()ed.
>>   
> 
> Oh, certainly. Except that sometimes the "just" is a pretty big one. I
> remember once ... well, to make a long story short, control over pool
> lifetime wasn't, and we ended up jumping through several Klein bottles
> to get there.

I think a proposal to make them optional would be very interesting, I 
know some people (Garrett Rooney?) had some ideas on this.

Thanks,

Paul

Mime
View raw message