I think that question is best answered by the people who develop mod_cache, aka dev@httpd.apache.org.
That said, I'll offer a guess: that is along-lived hash table that will see plenty of churn over time. An APR hash table would continue to grow and consume memory, but you really don't want that to occur in mod_cache. Thus, to keep memory reasonably constrained, it avoids using pools. Cheers, -g On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 13:52, sridhar basam <s...@basam.org> wrote: > > Anyone know why the mod_cache code has an almost identical implementation of > the apr_hash* functions? Seems like the only difference is that the > mod_cache implementation isn't using APR pools and has a fixed size table. > Are there any advantages using one over the other? > > thanks, > Sridhar