httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <b...@wstoddard.com>
Subject Re: Review of possible replacement for pools
Date Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:12:17 GMT
Why are we spending time trying to optimize pools when we haven't eliminated the
malloc/frees in the bucket brigade calls? The miniscule performance improvements
you -might- get optimizing pools will be completely obscured by the overhead of the
malloc/frees.

Bill

> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
> >On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 08:05:03PM +0200, Sander Striker wrote:
> >
> >>Adding an option to apr_pool_create_ex to indicate that the pool is
> >>going to be shared across threads would be an option I can certainly
> >>live with.  OTOH, this will introduce an extra if(lock) pair in the
> >>apr_palloc and apr_pcalloc calls.  I'll send in a patch later on.
> >>
> >
> >If you aren't shared, you have an extra NULL-check.  I think that is
> >acceptable.  If you are shared, we make sure we can't get trounced.
> >
> I agree, as long as the NULL-check doesn't measurably impact
> performance.  One of the key success factors for the original pool
> code is the very short code path in the common case where it doesn't
> need to allocate new blocks.  Adding another branch to this code
> path might or might not slow it down measurably--but we can find
> out through benchmarking.
>
> --Brian
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message