On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 04:11:21PM -0800, Ian Holsman wrote:
> would anyone mind too much if I add some purify hooks into
> the pool code? (sanders & current) They will be #ifdef'd
> this will help in our internal debugging efforts, and anyone
> else who uses purify.
How about we get the new code
Brian Pane wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:35:01PM -0800, Brian Pane wrote:
Some test results, thanks to Ian H.:
http://webperf.org/a2/v30/
This compares today's httpd-2.0 CVS head with
my "recycle pools" patch for the worker MPM and
Sander's new implementation of pools
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:35:01PM -0800, Brian Pane wrote:
Some test results, thanks to Ian H.:
http://webperf.org/a2/v30/
This compares today's httpd-2.0 CVS head with
my "recycle pools" patch for the worker MPM and
Sander's new implementation of pools.
Sander's pool cod
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:35:01PM -0800, Brian Pane wrote:
> Some test results, thanks to Ian H.:
> http://webperf.org/a2/v30/
> This compares today's httpd-2.0 CVS head with
> my "recycle pools" patch for the worker MPM and
> Sander's new implementation of pools.
>
> Sander's pool code yielded
Some test results, thanks to Ian H.:
http://webperf.org/a2/v30/
This compares today's httpd-2.0 CVS head with
my "recycle pools" patch for the worker MPM and
Sander's new implementation of pools.
Sander's pool code yielded a substantial drop
in usr CPU consumption (see the "cpuu" links on
the tes
