httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cliff Skolnick <cl...@organic.com>
Subject Re: on fopen() vs. open()
Date Tue, 09 Apr 1996 19:22:47 GMT

replaceing all fopen()'s with open()'s could be a perfomance problem, please
don't do this.  I say we get the solaris bug fixed.  I will talk with 
some people at sun today :(

when is fopen() way better?  when you are reading small bits (like lines 
of a text file) instead of large chuck >512 bytes.

On Tue, 9 Apr 1996 sameer@c2.org wrote:

> > 
> > Ugh. I forgot about that. I thought it was fixed, at least in 2.5. No sense
> > having 4E6 fds if stdio fopen() only uses an unsigned char. Like you say
> > open() is messier, but works.
> > 
> 
> 	Yes, this is ugly. I previously thought that fixing the
> logfile FILE *'s would fix things, but *all* FILE *'s need to be
> fixed.
> 
> 	I propose replacing all FILE * with BUFF *. Is that something
> we should do to workaround solaris bug?
> 
> -- 
> Sameer Parekh					Voice:   510-601-9777x3
> Community ConneXion, Inc.			FAX:     510-601-9734
> The Internet Privacy Provider			Dialin:  510-658-6376
> http://www.c2.net/ (or login as "guest")		sameer@c2.net
> 

--
Cliff Skolnick                                      cliff@organic.com

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759



Mime
View raw message