Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> > But proc_mutex.c has the below:
> >
> > case APR_LOCK_DEFAULT:
> > #if APR_USE_FLOCK_SERIALIZE
> > new_mutex->inter_meth = &apr_proc_mutex_unix_flock_methods;
> > #elif APR_USE_SYSVSEM_SERIALIZE
> > new_mutex->inter_meth = &apr_proc_mu
Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >
> > Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Are people happy with the priority order of the accept mutex?
> > > Right now it's flock -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> pthread.
> > >
> > > I think it should be pthread -> sysvse
Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Are people happy with the priority order of the accept mutex?
> > Right now it's flock -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> pthread.
> >
> > I think it should be pthread -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> flock, which
> > is what 1.3 has...
>
> I re
Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Are people happy with the priority order of the accept mutex?
> Right now it's flock -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> pthread.
>
> I think it should be pthread -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> flock, which
> is what 1.3 has...
I realize everybody has jumped in and +1-ed y
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 12:49:32PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I think it should be pthread -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> flock, which
> is what 1.3 has...
+1. -- justin
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 12:49:32PM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Are people happy with the priority order of the accept mutex?
> Right now it's flock -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> pthread.
>
> I think it should be pthread -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> flock, which
> is what 1.3 has...
Now that we're more confi
Are people happy with the priority order of the accept mutex?
Right now it's flock -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> pthread.
I think it should be pthread -> sysvsem -> fcntl -> flock, which
is what 1.3 has...
--
===
Jim Jagielski
