+---+
| Bugzilla Bug ID |
| +-+
| | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned
Bojan Smojver wrote:
On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 05:45 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Use apr_pool_pre_cleanup_register for reslist cleanup
Coming back to the original commit message and given the discussion on
the list, are we backporting On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 05:45 +, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Hello,
I downloaded the latest snapshot of APR and I fixed it under Mingw+MSys.
Description of changes:
(1) libtool does not work if $top_builddir is undefined.
(2) I cannot really understand why the configure script made this crap:
Checking for libraries...
checking for getpid in -lmsvcrt...
On 07/28/2008 01:52 AM, Bojan Smojver wrote:
I think we should be a little bit more strict when it comes to resource
limits in reslist code. As per attached, it should not be possible to
set min to less than zero and hmax to zero, as both don't make sense.
Comments?
Looks good. +1.
On 07/28/2008 02:03 AM, Bojan Smojver wrote:
On Sun, 2008-07-27 at 13:50 +0100, Nick Kew wrote:
+1.
Here is a rough sketch, so please review. Please note the enforcement of
min, smax and hmax to 1.
Hm, of course still a lot of overhead to manage a single resource. But I am
not really
On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 20:45 +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Hm, of course still a lot of overhead to manage a single resource.
True. I first started writing the patch with just a (void *) pointing to
the resource, but then I realized that ttl actually may be useful for
recycling it. So, rather
On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 12:27 +0200, Mladen Turk wrote:
I plan to thoroughly test those changes against httpd this week.
So lets wait for a while. If that stops tagging 1.3.x, we can
postpone that for next tag.
OK. I'm also hoping we'll hear from others.
--
Bojan
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:30:20AM +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote:
The first one may upset some software out there (probably some very
corner cases - I can't actually think of an example where it would, to
be honest), although it won't httpd's mod_dbd for sure.
It does seem like existing callers
On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 23:51 +0100, Joe Orton wrote:
It does seem like existing callers could reasonably depend on the
existing behaviour, and that changing it would break them.
The situation is quite complicated. Tricks like the ones from mod_dbd
(or malloc()/free() container + zero sub-pool
