Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-modules-dev-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 56228 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2007 12:44:17 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Apr 2007 12:44:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 41212 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2007 12:44:23 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-modules-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 41195 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2007 12:44:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact modules-dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: modules-dev@httpd.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list modules-dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 41185 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2007 12:44:22 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of scarleton@gmail.com designates 64.233.184.239 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.184.239] (HELO wr-out-0506.google.com) (64.233.184.239) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:44:20 -0700 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 58so1699631wri for ; Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:42:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=gxVehvS15kIjdbkmziwTpmvtZGWJRHSCs24rdqo3Q8UnF+6lrUrgP36TY4N/KWa2Nf7jONCmMxkf2X0masEwGanSFkoxkSFqj5fgIuHhbN2ow2BcFcwOj9/lABWwPhzWsG9CG+kux9r19Zecv6UFKtcdxkMDbitIab0bI9li7FE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=iLFqZ1vDCEV0PiNh+O5MEhBVvMPMCeRF2qGZwzHskMSocRmr+3QsBiUZh3wq36nVVoeiRaH+Xx0hjZP3vUDvcg+cqDnTmoGZwX+nD9W2o0B2EaVNN5Uu4DW5/cbWCTaVaNmdrTLFzgfIddTW1zvT+C3IY6YeYT8V3bPMtSdCsyM= Received: by 10.115.61.1 with SMTP id o1mr2218585wak.1175604171841; Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.122.10 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Apr 2007 05:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8d38ca0a0704030542j4ed60aa9p15a30b77ee2aa9a6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 08:42:51 -0400 From: "Sam Carleton" To: modules-dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: concern about memory management In-Reply-To: <461227C3.6080203@su.sabanciuniv.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <8d38ca0a0704021844j669d29b9vad9e112c9a1c919c@mail.gmail.com> <461227C3.6080203@su.sabanciuniv.edu> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 4/3/07, Burak Arslan wrote: > afaik, apache does not offer a proper free() function, which might cause > problems with image processing modules(if you're processing multiple images per > connection). so i'd not attempt to hack that library only to get the same > functionality as before. your call, though. I have not dug deeply into the Apache pools, yet, but... My impression was that I could create use sub pools to get the same effect as free(). My whole sole objective here is to speed up the image processing, my thought is that by using the Apache pools, the memory aspect of the process will be faster.