On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, dean gaudet wrote: > > > On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > > Yup. I've brought this up to Sander and David before, but this is how > > pools > > woah. no way really? > > that's not at all how it was in 1.3 or in early 2.0 ... > > in 2.0 as of uh a year ago say, there was one free list per process, > and locks were used to access it.
i checked -- top of tree pools still behaves almost like 1.3. so i'm not sure why you're claiming the pools would go up through the ancestors for an allocation. apr_palloc first tries the simple pointer arithmetic fast path, and if that fails it calls new_block() which accesses the process-global block_freelist (from inside an alloc_mutex critical section). -dean
