Alex Rousskov wrote:
On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 13:35 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:43 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote:
I can probably fix it myself, but it would help a lot if somebody
could
document (briefly!) the overall purpose of deferred reads and the
exact
purposes of these two nearly identical methods (one brief description
for each, please):
From memory...
DeferredReadManager::kickReads(int const count)
do up to count reads that have been deferred
and
DeferredReadManager::flushReads()
do all reads
Which makes more sense then to cleanup make flushReads() == kickReads(-1),
or similar instead of duplication.
Avoiding duplication was not "possible" when the class was written
because of the reentrant callbacks and lack of size() accounting in the
cbdata list used by the class. The author was, apparently, worried that
the reads list will grow as it is being emptied, causing an infinite
loop.
I think I remember the kickReads() commit in a fuzzy way. I think it was
a quick hack to prevent CPU overload and delays on high-performance
sites when the list was large. Done without full knowlege of the
deferred reads code, then ported from 2.6 without fixing.
I think we can merge the two methods now because callbacks can no longer
be reentrant. I will add a \todo.
I wasn't criticizing the original design, merely making a point about
that is now may be easily fixable. The TODO is good if there is no time
or code-monkey minion to do a patch.
Amos
--
Please use Squid 2.7.STABLE4 or 3.0.STABLE9
