perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <>
Subject Re: [Fwd: Re: map_to_storage hook question..]
Date Thu, 02 Oct 2003 20:29:18 GMT
Geoffrey Young wrote:
>>> well, from the sounds of Bill's email, map_to_storage is going to run 
>>> even if you return OK from a PerlTransHandler, and it's 
>>> map_to_storage that consumes the overhead of stat'ing the filesystem 
>>> for static files.
>>> but I could be misunderstanding - I haven't looked at the code yet.
>> I think not. That's precisely the point of:
>>   PerlTransHandler Apache::Constants::OK
> yes, I'm aware of that.
>> which causes map_to_storage to skip. I think it's the same in mp2.
> apparently it isn't.  I modified mod_example.c to hook map_to_storage 
> and returned OK from a PerlTransHandler.  mod_example's translate 
> handler is not called, but map_to_storage still is.


   PerlTransHandler Apache::OK

without setting r->filename was segfaulting in httpd-2.0, I think it has been 
fixed, but I don't remember whether I have tested it since then. So it's a 
different behavior in httpd-2.0, since httpd-1.3 then. But we could internally 
shortcut map_to_storage if transhandler has returned OK, no? Do we really need 
yet another hook?

>>> but regardless, as with all things apache, if it exists we should 
>>> probably open it up :)
>> If it's of any use to us, sure, otherwise, not really. IMHO, 
>> PerlTransHandler is just fine for this.
> looks like it will be value added.  I'll put something together soonish 
> for this.

Would it still be an added value if we can make PerlTransHandler behave like 
1.3 did?

Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker     mod_perl Guide --->

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message