Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 79264 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2008 22:10:34 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Mar 2008 22:10:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 21856 invoked by uid 500); 19 Mar 2008 22:10:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 21796 invoked by uid 500); 19 Mar 2008 22:10:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 21785 invoked by uid 99); 19 Mar 2008 22:10:28 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:10:28 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.202.165.29] (HELO smtpauth17.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net) (64.202.165.29) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 22:09:39 +0000 Received: (qmail 29016 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2008 22:09:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (71.239.140.137) by smtpauth17.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.29) with ESMTP; 19 Mar 2008 22:09:59 -0000 Message-ID: <47E18F36.1090609@rowe-clan.net> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:09:58 -0500 From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: PR44641: Does patch make sense References: <47E17F2F.4080508@apache.org> <20080319212220.3814b5a0@grimnir> <47E189A3.4010706@apache.org> <47E18C5B.4010808@beamartyr.net> In-Reply-To: <47E18C5B.4010808@beamartyr.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Issac Goldstand wrote: > > > I don't think it's a problem. IIRC, the pool that goes to > register_hooks is the pconf pool anyway. ? Ok - I was under the impression this was process->pool - ignore some of my prior message, nothing special about hash cleanups. Bill