> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jeff Trawick
> apr_pool_tag() would seem to be very cheap in terms of space and > time as well as potentially useful for debugging problems in > production builds. > > Does it really need to be noop-ed if APR_POOL_DEBUG isn't defined? I don't know. I noop-ed it, because it was only likely to be usefull when debugging. If people think otherwise we can put it behind APR_POOL_TAG or something like that, or leave it on always. > I'd like to see it always and I'd like to tweak Apache to use it in > more places. Yes. When working on sms I had a full set of changes for httpd. At every pool create there was a tag. Got rid of the changes though when we removed sms from the codebase. > I see that today apr_pool_tag() is almost the only thing controlled > via APR_POOL_DEBUG but I would imagine that folks will implement more > costly debug tools in the figure which you'd get with APR_POOL_DEBUG. Yes. Working on it. I have time in two days to round it up. It's going to be very straight forward. > Thoughts? > > (just fretting about the latest SIGHUP segfault with worker; pretty > likely that it is a pool misuse; it'd be nice to walk through the > coredump seeing "process", "pconf", "transaction", etc. yeah I can > define APR_POOL_DEBUG but what happens when APR_POOL_DEBUG gets too > expensive to use on a normal basis?) This sounds like good moment to introduce for APR_POOL_TAG. > -- > Jeff Trawick Sander
