On 12/08/2007 07:41 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >>>> >>>> On Dec 5, 2007 8:36 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> * My test case lead to the exceptional situation of a very >>>> large passbb bucket brigade >>>>> (about 1,000,000 buckets) as a result of processing 4 MB >>>> of the file. So I add >>>>> a flush bucket once I have more than MAX_BUCKET (1000) >>>> buckets in the brigade and pass it >>>>> down the chain to get it send and the passbb bucket >>>> brigade cleaned up and its memory >>>>> reusable again. >>>> >>>> > > By the by, even though we just use MAX_BUCKET here, it does > seem that there is high potential for naming conflicts > for this define... Maybe prefix it with some AP_* junk > just in case?
Fixed in r602533. You may want to add it to the backport proposal as well. Regards Rüdiger
