httpd-apreq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <>
Subject Re: Trying to test current apreq2 CVS
Date Fri, 02 Jul 2004 20:55:02 GMT
Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Markus Wichitill <> writes:
> [...]
>>But even without any non-zero offset seeking I didn't have much luck with
>>$upload->fh, though my results are too inconsistent to make a useful report.
>>Usually after something like a single read($upload->fh, $buf, 3) or
>>seek($upload->fh, 0, 0) the tempfile was gone.
> Ok, I've committed a few modifications to the test suite that show
> a few problems with our fh() implementation. This is the reason I've
> been reluctant to downplay bucket brigades, since they are a better 
> solution than filehandles are (file buckets don't buffer file IO, and 
> they always perform a seek before every file-read operation).  Unless 
> APR::PerlIO could be made to behave similarly, IMO maybe we're better off 
> implementing fh() in straight perl, by just opening $upload->tempname()
> (Randy, does Win32 even let you do that)?

APR::PerlIO gives you an access to the filehandle. It can't know what's kind 
of buckets (if at all) are used behind the apr_file_t front, if that's what 
you were suggesting. If not, please be more explicit to what you've meant by 
saying "APR::PerlIO could be made to behave similarly"

Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker     mod_perl Guide --->

View raw message