httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Cliff Woolley" <jwool...@wlu.edu>
Subject Re: [PATCH] buckets: appending to a bucket_brigade (untested)
Date Thu, 13 Jul 2000 02:07:49 GMT
>>> rbb@covalent.net 07/12/00 19:20 PM >>>
>Cliff, GREAT!!!!!!  Thanks for the patch.  I'm
>unlikely to review and
>apply this tonight, but I should get to it tomorrow.

Cool.  There's one other side-effect of the patch that I forgot to
mention before, and I don't know if it's what you want or not.  I
removed the ap_bucket_list_init() function, since it seemed to be
unnecessary now that ap_bucket_list_create() uses calloc() instead of
malloc().  <shrug>  I couldn't think of any reason that we ever want to
reuse a bucket_list and therefore want to re-init it... anyway, if you
really do want that function still, just take that part of the patch out
and it shouldn't affect anything else in the patch.

I've got a pretty good line on where some of the memory leaks are... I
should be able to submit another patch after I see your next rev. in
CVS.

(PS: sorry I can't really test this stuff even for compilability... the
hard drive on my development box crashed the other day <sigh>, and I
haven't gotten a chance to replace it yet.)


>I had a vague idea that there were memory leaks, but
>I haven't really looked into them yet.  I want to get
>the basic code working to prove the
>design, and then go back and clean it all up.

I know.  I'm just trying to help clean up, since I know you're working
on fleshing it out.  I think I saw at least one more "this doesn't work"
comment... I'll try to look into repairing that function tomorrow
morning.  If you can think of any other clean-up or even
API-implementation-type things that someone like me could be working on,
by all means just say so.

I do have one general design question... I don't really understand why
in some cases it would be necessary to shuffle a bucket out to disk. 
There's at least oe comment in the code that says that situation exists
in some case or another.  What if we have less disk space to work with
than RAM?  (That's not an unusual situation where I work <grin>.)  Or
have I missed the point?  Just curious.

Thanks...

--Cliff



Mime
View raw message