On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 12:34:37PM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote: > This is what I was alluding to in my absurdly vague message early on in > this thread. What I failed to realize at the time was that we don't have > a good way of getting that pool/freelist pointer deep into our filter > APIs. Am I looking at this correctly now?
Yup. The only thing I can think of is adding a "bucket_freelist" parameter to ap_new_connection - this would be similar to the ptrans pool (but not cleared like ptrans at the end of the connection). Then, use f->c->bucket_freelist as the parameter to the bucket_create functions. I dunno if I like that or not... But, that's the cleanest solution I can see without having the buckets handle this all internally (which no one else seems to like). -- justin
