On Oct 30, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 11:36:43 -0700
"Justin Erenkrantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
3) change the interface: deal with the buckets entirely in
mod_cache and just pass (char *,size_t) pairs to store_body
#3 gets my vote. I hate bucket brigades anyway. ;-)
-1 to doing that with local, static files. And once you start
making exceptions to a rule, that becomes BAD complexity.
But as an either/or option (either bucket or buf), that's fine.
If you are going to -1 something, you need to have a technical reason
for it IN THE MESSAGE. You can't assume that your reason is obvious.
In this case, I have to assume that you are worried about the file
bucket having to go through user space to be stored, as opposed to
more efficient routines handling it like a sendfile. However,
since we aren't talking about network writes in store_body, and
store_body will have to read/write the data as buffers anyway,
I don't see any justification for that veto.
....Roy
