httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From r..@covalent.net
Subject Re: cvs commit: apache-2.0/src/modules/mpm/mpmt_pthread mpmt_pthread.c
Date Fri, 23 Jun 2000 19:33:42 GMT

> > There is no need to set an indicator, just don't allocate memory.
> 
> That was my original plan, but then we'd need a separate place to store the
> args from ap_set_local_port() and ap_set_local_ipaddr().  Allocating
> storage at all the right points is tedious also.
> 
> It seems sufficient to turn on a flag when we have done something
> which (probably) invalidated our view of the socket name.

Okay, I haven't thought hard about this, it was just a thought.

> 
> > > . storing a pipe in an ap_socket_t works (until you try to do
> > >   something socket-specific with it like ap_get_local_port)
> > 
> > This seems to be a common thought these days.  THIS IS BAD!!!!!  
> 
> What does your comment allude to?

The idea of storing a pipe in an ap_socket_t without using the APR
provided functions.  I am a bit defensize about this because of the ntoes
from yesterday.  I'm sorry.  :-)

> > Storing a pipe in a socket is not good, unless the platform sets
> > APR_FILES_AS_SOCKETS, in which case we have a function that can do
> > it.  This is not a good thing, because on many platforms pipes and sockets
> > are not the same thing.  There are operations that you can do on a socket
> > that you can't do on a pipe, and vice versa.  I have and will continue to
> > fight this until.
> 
> I don't understand what you're trying to convince me of.

That making these changes so that we can store pipes in sockets is the
wrong solution.

> Relax...  I'm not pretending to have come up with any new ideas.  I've
> seen some of these comments before and nobody has done anything.  I'm
> simply stating a very specific proposal of something I could do in the
> short term.

I don't want to sound defensive.  This has nothing to do with who came up
with the ideas.  I am worried about the messages that seem to want to
combine the file and socket types.

> As a recap, you suggest that I don't allocate storage for local_addr
> initially so I can use that as the indicator... I'm claiming that is
> problematic.  Do you agree or disagree?

I really don't know.  I haven't really thought about it.  If you say it is
problematic, then I believe you.

As a side note, I am mildly concerned about how quick we are to add little
flags to APR and apache structures.  This doesn't matter for mainline
Apache, but it becomes a real issue if Apache ever tries to get into some
smaller machines such as palm pilots.  This isn't saying we don't need all
these flags, just that they probably shouldn't always be our first
thought.

Ryan

_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Mime
View raw message