Mailing-List: contact dev-help@trafficserver.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@trafficserver.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy includes SPF record at
 spf.trusted-forwarder.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
Subject: Re: git commit: TS-2415: use standard continuations to release
 UrlRewrite objects
From: Leif Hedstrom <zwoop@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <ef98513b5ecd4672a24d9dfa9d04e2a0@git.apache.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 08:37:51 -0700
Cc: commits@trafficserver.apache.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FFBD1E81-32FA-4FFF-BA04-C59FC4C80B94@apache.org>
References: <ef98513b5ecd4672a24d9dfa9d04e2a0@git.apache.org>
To: dev <dev@trafficserver.apache.org>

On Dec 3, 2013, at 10:30 PM, jpeach@apache.org wrote:

> Updated Branches:
>  refs/heads/master 2b6a5f6bb -> 0f9305dc6
>=20
>=20
> TS-2415: use standard continuations to release UrlRewrite objects
>=20
> UrlRewrite uses a custom continuation to release the old object
> after it is no longer needed. We can use library code for this
> instead. Use new_Deleter to free the old UrlRewrite object.
>   newTable =3D NEW(new UrlRewrite());
>   if (newTable->is_valid()) {
> -    eventProcessor.schedule_in(new =
UR_FreerContinuation(rewrite_table), URL_REWRITE_TIMEOUT, ET_TASK);
> +    new_Deleter(rewrite_table, URL_REWRITE_TIMEOUT);
>     Debug("url_rewrite", "remap.config done reloading!");
>     ink_atomic_swap(&rewrite_table, newTable);
>   } else {
>=20


Fwiw, this new_Deleter does not have the same semantics as the old code. =
The old code would schedule the deletion on the ET_TASK thread pool, =
whereas new_Deleter runs on any of the net-threads. This could mean that =
we=92d block a net-thread for some time if the remap table is =
sufficiently large.

I don=92t know if it is a real, detrimental problem, but if I recall we =
moved the remap.config reloading / management to ET_TASK because it did =
have a real problem when loading very large configs.

Maybe the right thing is to make new_Deleter use ET_TASK? If there are =
no task threads configured, that falls back to the old behavior?

=97 Leif