httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: [2.0] lstat's in spite of AllowOverride None
Date Wed, 07 Nov 2001 16:43:35 GMT
From: "Martin Kraemer" <Martin.Kraemer@Fujitsu-Siemens.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 10:23 AM


> On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 09:31:03AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > > Yep, of course. Also, the SHMHT (shared memory hash table) might help us
> > > avoid redundant l?stat()s overall.
> > 
> > I'm wondering what the buy will be compared with OS caching?  I'm certain we will
> > see significantly different improvements depending on the underlying kernel cache.
> 
> Right. "Current modern OS's" aren't always as optimized as they could be
> (someone measured 1000 cps before the forward walk change against around
> 330 cps after this change, on win2k). And a system call always means
> (on unix, at least) much higher overhead than a function call.

The direct-hit method should clear up much of this confusion, since I rather suspect
that we are also seeing side effects of the recent filtering changes.


Mime
View raw message