----- Original Message ----- From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mladen Turk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Aaron Bannert'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 8:53 PM Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] apr_shm_t, a new shared memory API to replace old
> > I'm also looking at the API and understand why you were worried about the > anon. But what you describe is a hybrid, a named, anon shm. For now, we > will be using backing files; adding both keyed and named create where the > platform supports both is a reasonable potential improvement in the future. > The reason for using a filename and a NAME for that file (that was my initial post to Aaron) has nothing to do with the keyed/named created shms. Simply, the Apache could create whatever shmem file with some NAME, and the rest of the world can access it simply using that NAME. MT.
