httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From r..@covalent.net
Subject Re: Bucket/brigade re-use pool.
Date Wed, 17 Jan 2001 01:35:01 GMT

> > Understand Dean, we aren't saying that the API couldn't be changed to work
> > better, but people in the group have veto'ed changing the ap_r*
> > API's.  This severly ties our hands when it comes to making those
> > functions work well with the buckets.
> 
> Err, that's a bit disingenuous.  More accurate to say that some of us maintain that we
need a
> buffered i/o API that is efficient and does not require module writers to learn how to
program to
> the bucket API. ap_r* seemed a good place.


It isn't disingenuous at all.  We said that in order to make ap_r* work
well with buckets, we would need to pass the bucket_brigade into
ap_r*.  We were then told that we weren't allowed to modify the API.  If I
could pass a brigade to ap_r* functions, then I could do all sorts of
buffering that I can't do now.  In fact, I plan to fix this problem by
completely ignoring ap_r* functions, and just creating ap_brigade_*
functions that directly map to ap_r*, except instead of passing in a
request_rec, you will pass in a bucket_brigade.  We get all the nice
API's, but the buffering is allowed to work.

BTW, I am 99% sure this will be done without modifying any existing API's,
and adding a few new ones, to get all the functions that we currently have
in ap_r*.

> The API will be with us for a long time. I am interested in getting it right before we
start asking
> folks to write to it.

Explain to me how using a pool of buckets instead of malloc/free will
change the API, and I will completely agree.

Ryan

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


Mime
View raw message