httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Bloom <>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Rework httpd buckets/filtering
Date Mon, 24 Sep 2001 03:41:52 GMT
On Sunday 23 September 2001 08:35 pm, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
> > > > +APU_DECLARE(apr_status_t) apr_brigade_to_buffer(apr_bucket_brigade
> > > > *b, char *c); +
> >
> > Ryan said this should take a reading mode. I don't understand why that
> > should be necessary. You have a brigade of a defined size, and you're
> > flattening that much data. You're already past the point of non-blocking
> > reads being used.
> FWIW, I agree with Greg on this point.  I can't see any point to allowing
> nonblocking mode, just as there's no point to allowing nonblocking mode in
> apr_brigade_partition or apr_brigade_length.  What good would nonblocking
> mode be?  If you really want the brigade flattened out that bad, then you
> REALLY want it flattened... you don't want half of it flattened.
> But more importantly, you have to REALLY want it flat in the first place.
> IMO adding a function like this encourages lazy coders to abuse it so that
> they don't have to deal with things spanning buckets.  If mod_include just
> flattened the brigade it worked on it would be a much simpler module.
> But it would suck for performance and break our whole zero-copy mantra.
> I'm -0 for adding a function like this to the buckets API.

I'll see your -0, and raise you to a -0.5.  :-)


Ryan Bloom
Covalent Technologies

View raw message