From dev-return-21632-apmail-apr-dev-archive=apr.apache.org@apr.apache.org Fri Mar 27 15:41:09 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 80843 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2009 15:41:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Mar 2009 15:41:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 12827 invoked by uid 500); 27 Mar 2009 15:41:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 12753 invoked by uid 500); 27 Mar 2009 15:41:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 12741 invoked by uid 99); 27 Mar 2009 15:41:08 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:41:08 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jim@jagunet.com designates 209.133.192.6 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.133.192.6] (HELO jaguNET.com) (209.133.192.6) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:40:59 +0000 Received: from [10.11.0.240] (89-250-190-16.tangos.nl [89.250.190.16]) by devsys.jaguNET.com (jagunet-1.1/jagunet-1.1) with ESMTP id n2RFeaVr038716; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:40:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jim@jagunet.com) Cc: Justin Erenkrantz , =?UTF-8?Q?Branko_=C4=8Cibej?= , Paul Querna , APR Developer List Message-Id: From: Jim Jagielski To: Mladen Turk In-Reply-To: <49CCEE23.5060601@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Subject: Re: Poor performance with new apr_pool Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:40:31 -0400 References: <49CB671F.9040801@apache.org> <4239a4320903260549s3679e713u3f314a870e7ad24b@mail.gmail.com> <4239a4320903260632ld52bd4h310853d66c157b5c@mail.gmail.com> <4239a4320903260740l6786164l7d682c4d8a37d59b@mail.gmail.com> <49CBB5F6.30601@apache.org> <4239a4320903261024l4ca2ecd3jd91229f9883602cd@mail.gmail.com> <49CBE671.9050201@xbc.nu> <5c902b9e0903261651v4c688c68l664631d56992825c@mail.gmail.com> <3E642EEB-CBDC-402E-A119-DB5F6F0ACE28@jaguNET.com> <49CCEE23.5060601@apache.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Mar 27, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Mladen Turk wrote: > Jim Jagielski wrote: >> On Mar 26, 2009, at 7:51 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >>> 2009/3/26 Branko =C4=8Cibej : >>>> Maybe it's just me, but all that seems like a monumental waste of =20= >>>> time. >>> >>> If we can't beat the old system by COB tomorrow consistently, then I >>> think we can simply revert it or we add tcmalloc as a compile-time >>> option if it's not too complex to use that. >> Before we do that, why not spin off a dev branch of what we =20 >> currently have >> so those of us interested in profiling can still do some work >> on it... > > Sure, you can do that. > > The problem with design concept will however stay. > apr_pool and malloc/free simply don't fit with each other. > Well, kind of depends on what apr_pool actually is :) BTW: shared this with some of the team. Did a framework test against httpd-trunk, apr-trunk and apr-1.4. Using apr-trunk the test absolutely fell down when doing t/modules/dir The current thinking is that it's the whole subpool crud