httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Graham Leggett" <minf...@sharp.fm>
Subject Re: cache: the store_body interface
Date Tue, 31 Oct 2006 11:49:10 GMT
On Tue, October 31, 2006 12:59 pm, Joe Orton wrote:

> I very much sympathise with this argument.  But it does mean that the
> storage provider cannot break any of the assumptions mentioned in the
> other thread: it enforces the synchronous store-to-disk and
> write-to-client model.
>
> I think it's a reasonable desire to ship a non-default storage provider
> which implements the "stop and write entire response to disk before
> sending anything to the client" model.  But #1 prevents that; such
> tricks could only be done somehow at mod_cache level, or only by
> entirely replacing the cache.

Are you referring to the existing attempt at achieving "stop and write
entire reponse to disk _while_ independently sending to the client"?

All the large_disk_cache needs from cache to achieve this is access to
request_rec, which it does in both #1 and #2.

>From there it's a simple kevent or notifier equivalent to determine
whether the socket buffer is free. Ideally, this should be abstracted into
a convenience function in the core, somelike like ap_write_will_block().

Regards,
Graham
--



Mime
View raw message