Hi there,
On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Doremus, Matthew wrote:
> Is this to say that an underlying memory allocator would return an address
> from the malloc function of memory which had previously been allocated by
> another process ? This seems to be somewhat chaotic for any memory
> allocation, shar
>On Fri, Jan 12, 2001, Doremus, Matthew wrote:
>
>> I have been looking through the mod_ssl v7.2.1 SHMHT code and it
>appears
>> that each server creates it's own hash table in the allocated
shared >memory.
>> Does this imply that when using SHMHT servers on
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2001, Doremus, Matthew wrote:
>
> > I have been looking through the mod_ssl v7.2.1 SHMHT code and it appears
> > that each server creates it's own hash table in the allocated shared memory.
> > Does this imply that when using SHMH
On Fri, Jan 12, 2001, Doremus, Matthew wrote:
> I have been looking through the mod_ssl v7.2.1 SHMHT code and it appears
> that each server creates it's own hash table in the allocated shared memory.
> Does this imply that when using SHMHT servers only retrieve sessions that
> they themselves hav
