On Sat, 7 Apr 2001, Greg Stein wrote:
> Um... let's not forget that you haven't posted the patch(es) to new-httpd
> yet (i.e. most of us haven't seen them). It should not be committed until
> that happens. I think there are a number of concerns that people have (Roy,
> myself) with the proposed design.
The patch was posted when we posted that we had a server running with the
patch. A version that compiles and runs against HEAD can be found at
http://klomp.covalent.net:8080.
> For myself, I find the state_rec to be superfluous, and the overall intent
> feels like forcing some kind of commonality between protocols rather than
> providing a structure for multi-protocol (and then building on that). If
> pieces of protocols can be shared, then share the functionality, but don't
> put them into request_rec simply because two protocols happen to use them.
>
> Ideally, request_rec would contain only a few items. Things like a pool, the
> connection it is associated with, and a void* for the protocol-private
> information.
I agree, that should be the goal, but it is a large goal. This paper and
the corresponding patch are a first step. We are moving in the right
direction, but we don't pretend to doing everything required.
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
