Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 13:54:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dean Gaudet <dgaudet@arctic.org>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: Removing ap_dummy_mutex from API 
In-Reply-To: <13845.11577.954876.678185@zap.ml.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96dg4.981002135004.23241K-100000@twinlark.arctic.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
Status: O


On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, Ben Hyde wrote:

> How's it do a timeout without an interupt?

The only timeouts we've ever used are on socket i/o... and NSPR implements
that directly with a timeout on PR_Send() and PR_Recv().  So I put a
timeout into BUFF... and a callback for when the timeout is triggered. 
Search for ap_bonerror() to see how it's used. 

> Recalling that I couldn't find a way to interupt a thread on NT that's
> I'll accept that no interupts is the future.  I like interupts and
> don't quite know how you write code that avoids them without polling
> (aka non-preemptive multitasking).

pre-emption is fine with me. 

What I don't like are interrupted and restarted system calls.  Apache 1.3
has various race conditions due to signals that I don't think are
solveable.  For example, if you take a signal inside a 3rd party
library... you're toast.  You can't expect it to continue properly (some
do, some don't), and you can't longjmp out of it because it could leak
resources.  The only way around it is to not take the signal. 

Dean