Brian McCallister wrote: > On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Paul Querna <c...@force-elite.com> wrote: > >> I think doing it via the mpm/extending the request rec is the right way >> to do it, and I don't understand why there is resistance to just doing >> it that way? > > I don't think there is resistance, it is just a chunk of code *I* am > not comfortable making changes to as I do not grok it, yet. > > If you make such a change, or can point me to something to explain how > they work, it seems like a good approach -- we'll just need to > document that it is not safe to hold onto the pool if you use it.
r742218 adds conn_rec::current_thread, and implements support for it on all the common Unix MPMs..... It turns out its really hard to use the request_rec in the MPMs, but yet again its in trouble of where we draw the lines between MPMs and everything else.
