On May 16, 2013, at 4:19 AM, Thomas Eckert <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Just wondering if we also have a problem with the pool > > as well... if base doesn't have a proxy, we don't have > > the subpool. > > Looks like it. At least I don't see a reason why Nick's reasoning would apply > to the mutex but not to the pool. > > Hold on a tic... the server-conf is created for each server and it's a *module* level action. It happens whether the top-level server uses a proxy-or-not. That is, create_server_config is done on each and every server, regardless of whether that server *uses* mod_proxy at all. So base->pool and base->mutex will always line up with a created subpool and mutex since base is *guaranteed* to exist and base-><field> is guaranteed to have been created (if done so in create_server_config). Even with all that, I like Graham's mutex impl better and with http://svn.apache.org/r1483190 we now ensure child processes have access to it (which is likely what the orig issue really was)
