On 14/09/2006, at 04:24, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Davi Arnaut wrote:
I'm working on this. You may want to check my proposal at http://
verdesmares.com/Apache/proposal.txt
Will it be possible to do away with "one file for headers and one
file for body" in mod_disk_cache with this scheme?
http://verdesmares.com/Apache/patches/016.patch
The thing is that I've been pounding seriously at mod_disk_cache to
make it able to sustain rather heavy load on not-so-heavy
equipment, and part of that effort was to wrap headers and body
into one file for mainly the following purposes:
* Less files, less open():s (small gain)
* Way much easier to purge old entries from the cache (huge gain).
Simply list all files in cache, sort by atime and remove the oldest.
The old way by using htcacheclean took ages and had less useful
removal criteria.
* No synchronisation issues between the header file and body file,
unlink one and it's gone.
That's only one of many changes made, but I found it to be crucial
to be able to have an architecture that's consistent without
relying on locks. This made it rather easy to implement stuff like
serving files that are currently being cached from cache, reusing
expired cached files if the originating file is found to be
unmodified, and so on.
But the largest gain is still the cache cleaning process.
The stuff is used in production and seems stable, however I haven't
had any response to the first (trivial) patch sent so I don't know
if there's any interest in this.
/Nikke
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-
Niklas Edmundsson, Admin @ {acc,hpc2n}.umu.se |
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Does the Little Mermaid wear an algebra?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=
