On 05/05/2009 07:15 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> Author: jfclere
> Date: Tue May 5 17:15:48 2009
> New Revision: 771940
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=771940&view=rev
> Log:
> Change the order of mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer child_init().
> Change the balancer workers area to the address of workers instead copying
> the workers.
> Arrange lbmethod accordingly.
> Move the creation of conf->forward worker to mod_proxy child_init().
>
> Modified:
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/balancers/mod_lbmethod_bybusyness.c
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/balancers/mod_lbmethod_byrequests.c
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/balancers/mod_lbmethod_bytraffic.c
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/balancers/mod_lbmethod_heartbeat.c
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/examples/mod_lbmethod_rr.c
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy.c
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy.h
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy_balancer.c
> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
>
> @@ -1471,13 +1471,13 @@
>
> PROXY_DECLARE(void)
> ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer(apr_pool_t *pool, proxy_balancer *balancer,
> - proxy_worker *worker)
> + proxy_worker **worker)
IMHO providing *worker as the old code does is sufficient.
> {
> - proxy_worker *runtime;
> + proxy_worker **runtime;
>
> runtime = apr_array_push(balancer->workers);
> - memcpy(runtime, worker, sizeof(proxy_worker));
> - runtime->id = proxy_lb_workers;
> + memcpy(runtime, worker, sizeof(proxy_worker *));
Do we really need memcpy here? Shouldn't
*runtime = *worker
be sufficient or in the case that we go back to the old
function prototype shouldn't
*runtime = worker
be enough?
Regards
Rüdiger
