Branko Čibej wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Branko Čibej wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
3. make pools runtime-configurable whether they are just a thin
malloc()/free() wrapper or do internal reuse
I think there may be some interest in this ... we've learned the hard
way that pools as they stand today, while moderately nice for stateless
server implementations, are less than moderately horrible for anything else.
Nonsense ;-) It's just a matter of applying the right scope to the right
objects, and this is far simpler than anticipating when individual byte
allocations are free()ed.
Oh, certainly. Except that sometimes the "just" is a pretty big one. I
remember once ... well, to make a long story short, control over pool
lifetime wasn't, and we ended up jumping through several Klein bottles
to get there.
I think a proposal to make them optional would be very interesting, I
know some people (Garrett Rooney?) had some ideas on this.
Thanks,
Paul
