On 9/6/07, David Willams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Obviously, I'm not involved with apache internals, but are you saying it's
> architecturally impossible for apache to somehow manage a hash that can, at
> the same time, be available (read-only) to child processes?
There are things for apache t
Perrin - Thank you for your excellent, detailed response and experience. I
did not consider your proxy scenario and I will probably revisit both it and
your Berkley scenario a bit later.
Obviously, I'm not involved with apache internals, but are you saying it's
architecturally impossible for apac
On 9/6/07, David Willams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When the translation happens on a random, ad hoc string of sometimes
> thousands of "words", the process simply does something like this:
>
> Untranslated:
> hfj kei hty ... jan oej wio
>
> Translated:
> $CACHE{hfj} $CACHE{kei} $CACHE{hty}
Thanks Perrin - I have a translator-type application where the total store
size of %CACHE key=values is in the low-millions.
When the translation happens on a random, ad hoc string of sometimes
thousands of "words", the process simply does something like this:
Untranslated:
hfj kei hty ... jan
On 9/6/07, David Willams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Child processes cannot update %CACHE, so what other apache methods or
> architectural strategies exist (creative, elaborate, etc) or have been used
> to update a similar hash?
You'll find many discussions about sharing data in the list archives
Hello modperl,
I'm coming to grips with multi-process vs. multi-threaded limitations (and
benefits!).
For example, during start up, for sharing read-only data among child
processes, we do something like:
%CACHE = get_data( );
Child processes cannot update %CACHE, so what other apache methods or
