So, why were we using pconf??? :)
Seems like we've fixed a bug anyways. david > On Tuesday 08 January 2002 08:49 am, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 04:30:16PM -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > dreid 02/01/08 08:30:16 > > > > > > Modified: server main.c core.c > > > Log: > > > This small patch modifies the log's to use plog instead of pconf. > > > Basically pconf is cleared at different times from plog, and this > > > has the effect of leaving stderr closed when going into the next > > > stage of the config. This also had the effect of allowing FreeBSD > > > with threads to create a pipe with stderr's fd at one end, and this > > > resulted in problems with the signal polling and high cpu usage. > > > > > > In addition, move the clearing of plog from main.c to core.c where > > > it seems more appropriate. > > > > I don't think that moving the clear call is appropriate. Consider > > that ap_run_open_logs is a hook. I bet certain third-parties > > (*ahem* Covalent *ahem*) have their own hook into this function to > > override the logs. So, core_open_logs isn't guaranteed to be the > > only caller. I would suggest reverting this section. As long as the > > pool is cleared *right* before the hook is called, we should be okay. > > > > As for changing core_open_logs to use plog, I think it is the correct > > change though upon further review. In fact, if we aren't using plog, > > I think that is a bug. =) (Because then, it isn't the pool where > > the logs are from!) -- justin > > See: > http://www.apachelabs.org/apache-mbox/200010.mbox/<Pine.LNX.4.21.00101405484 [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Just change the ap_run_open_logs call to use plog instead of pconf, and > that should solve this problem. > > Ryan > > ______________________________________________________________ > Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------- >
