> From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > At 01:59 PM 8/2/2002, Ryan Bloom wrote: > > > Modified: poll/unix poll.c > > > Log: > > > We safely ignore palloc failures [we can segv in the allocator]. > > > We cannot ignore alloca/malloc failures. > > > >We generally ignore memory allocation errors of all kinds in the server > >and APR. The general thought has always been that if you are actually > >running out of memory or stack space, then your computer is hosed > >anyway, and you are going to seg fault. Why can't we follow the same > >rules here? > > apr_palloc can be told exactly how to die, the platform malloc and alloca > are different beasts altogether.
Huh? We don't have any logic to tell apr_palloc how to die. The assumption is that if the server runs out of memory, then apr_palloc will return NULL, and the code will seg fault. The exact same assumption can be made for malloc and alloca. There is no logic in apr_palloc which should actually cause the seg fault AFAIK, the seg fault is expected in the code that calls apr_palloc. Ryan
