On 09/24/2009 10:18 PM, Dan Poirier wrote: > Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org> writes: > >> On 09/24/2009 04:25 PM, poir...@apache.org wrote: >>> + If there's some other cache provider that has to read the whole >>> + cached body to fill in the brigade, though, that would make >>> + this rather expensive. >> Exactly for this reason I don't like this approach. Currently we have only >> mod_disk_cache but this might change in the future and the provider API is >> open. So there might be third party modules affected by this. >> >> Why don't we just count the bytes as we store them? My first thought would be >> to write a wrapper function for cache->provider->store_body() that could look >> like the following and would be called instead of >> cache->provider->store_body(): > > What I'd been thinking about, but haven't implemented yet, was extending > the cache provider API (in trunk only) so we can ask the cache provider > for the size.
+1 for trunk. > > Your idea of a wrapper function sounds good for 2.2 though, since it > doesn't require an API change. How about if I give that a try in trunk > so we can see how it works before considering a backport? +1 Regards Rüdiger
