Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> this patch:
> - removes if (!short_report) { } condition since the code inside this
> condition is already in the block of the same condition.
> + fixed alignment after removing the loop
> - moves a chunk of code to the condition's:
>
> if (ws_record.access_count != 0 ||
> ( ws_record.status != SERVER_READY
> && ws_record.status != SERVER_DEAD)) {
>
> block, since it was just wasting CPU cycles. Especially if a server has
> high server|thread_limit but has just a few threads/procs running.
maybe since the body of the loop is so darn big it would be clearer if
the check was:
+ if (ws_record.access_count == 0 &&
+ ( ws_record.status == SERVER_READY
+ || ws_record.status == SERVER_DEAD)) {
+ continue;
+ }
--
Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
