On Jan 1, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

>
> One thing which adds a wrinkle is that I envision various modules
> using various providers for slotmem, so, for example, mod_proxy
> would used shared mem and mod_cache would use DBM for example.
> In this case, you have one interface to 2 providers working at
> the same time and I'm not sure if ap_slotcache_t collisions
> could occur (if DBM defines it one way and sharedmem defines
> it another, and both providers are compiled and active, will
> stuff break?)... That was the rationale behind up-front defining
> the struct but trying to make it generic enough...
>

After researching, typedef's abstraction alleviates this
issue. So I'll start working on getter/setter functions for
slotmem and removing user-land locks. But I won't commit
anything until 2.3.1 is released...