Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of trawick@gmail.com designates
 64.233.170.196 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <cc67648e0409171736bed0791@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:36:59 -0400
From: Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Jeff Trawick <trawick@gmail.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix child reclaim timing
In-Reply-To: <20040915184922.GA4901@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <20040813135123.GA18095@redhat.com>
	 <cc67648e040813072775e065fd@mail.gmail.com>
	 <cc67648e040915104829f74841@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20040915184922.GA4901@redhat.com>

On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 19:49:22 +0100, Joe Orton <jorton@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 01:48:11PM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > Here's a patch that does something like I mentioned above, though it
> > bails out a bit sooner (9 or so seconds).  The timing of the
> > interesting actions in this patch can be tweaked in a much simpler
> > manner than the old 1.3 code allows.
> 
> Looks just as good to me, +1

re "just as good": it helps that stuff from jorton, jerenkrantz, and
nd don't go to my spam folder, then I don't go blindly patching... but
I committed mine anyway, with timings tweaked to be a little closer to
yours (a bit more patient in the intervals leading to SIGTERM) and
with the change below

> 
> > -         */
> > +    while (1) {
> >          apr_sleep(waittime);
> ...
> > -        if (!not_dead_yet) {
> > -            /* nothing left to wait for */
> > +        if (!not_dead_yet ||
> > +            action_table[cur_action].action == GIVEUP) {
> > +            /* nothing left to wait for, or we gave up */
> >              break;
> >          }
> >      }
> 
> ...is crying out to be a do/while :)

of course (thanks!)