Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
Message-ID: <033f01bfa4bb$11e34590$c1e01b09@raleigh.ibm.com>
From: "Bill Stoddard" <stoddard@raleigh.ibm.com>
To: <new-httpd@apache.org>
References: <000201bfa4ac$0160bb30$345985d0@corecomm.net>
Subject: Re: Should ap_bread et. al. be modified to work with async i/o APIs?
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 16:09:55 -0400
Organization: IBM Corp.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> Note that nonblocking mode is supported for compatibility with Microsoft�
> LAN Manager version 2.0 and should not be used to achieve asynchronous input
> and output (I/O) with named pipes

This put me off for a while, but a literal read of this statement does not discourage our
use. I want to use nonblocking mode to do "non-blocking I/O". Nonblocking i/o is not the
same as async I/O.  The reference to LAN Manager version 2.0 and async I/O are
nonsequiter.

> I've been watching the 'Bill Stoddard is/will...' list grow monthly.  Do you
> care to post the "I'm doing this now, am almost finished, contributors may
> as well choose another area to work on", vs. the "I'll get to these if
> someone doesn't beat me to it first" list?

Yikes!  Didn't know I had a long list and certainly don't want that to discourage others
from pitching in. There are a few things in the STATUS file with my name on them. I'll fix
that right away.

Right now, I am working on the non-blocking CGI problem. I have working code using
non-blocking names pipes. Need to clean it up a bit them I'll commit it. I'll do the winnt
MPM work to make it win 95/98 friendly.  Next, I want to finish work on the file handle
cache.  That's all I claim for now; please go for anything else!

I'll update the STATUS file with more stuff that needs to be done.

Bill