On 07 Jun 2013, at 2:55 PM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yeah, I think conn_rec would make sense if we were a single-threaded
> server, but considering the hybrid that we are, the real thing we're
> concerned about are the raw sockets. This also makes more sense
> with things like SPDY, iirc.

The reason I had conn_rec in mind wasn't to do with being single threaded, but 
rather to do with the supporting infrastructure like the logging API, etc 
taking a conn_rec. What would be less-than-ideal would be if we had a sudden 
proliferation of interfaces, each module trying to reinvent what conn_rec does.

The conn_rec structure doesn't dictate any single threaded behaviour, it just 
contains metadata about the socket after all, and optionally a link to a filter 
stack (and the filter stack need not have any single threaded concept either).

One thing I did notice - conn_rec contains all sorts of metadata about the 
socket, but not the apr_socket_t itself, and that isn't cool. Ideally we must 
fix that.

> I also like the "weirdness" of the API (socket grouping)... it's
> more robust.
> 
> I really, REALLY like this! ++1

To be clear I really like this too.

Regards,
Graham
--

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to