-----Original Message----- From: Aaron Bannert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >I think Justin is going in the other direction -- your proposed changes >need to be broken down into finer grained proposals/functionality.
I don't think I quite got it - I'll probably wait and see what he means by "a new APR API for accessing shmem that treats it as a fixed-length hash/DBM".. I'd be willing to help if required. >I'd rather see us leave the apr_shm stuff that's in there right now, >and then add your proposed freelist management code as an alternative or >supplement to our barebones apr_shm. That way we don't add unnecessary >overhead for code that's already using apr_shm, and we can still move >ahead with other shared data types which will eventually lead to other >forms of ssl session cache. I do share your concerns regarding the overhead.. But, I still feel that freelist management should be a part of any shared memory management. If there's no such policy, then we should just not coin the word *management* - because there's no management being done here. -Madhu
