On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Christophe JAILLET <
christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Le 28/03/2013 19:32, Jeff Trawick a écrit :
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday 25 March 2013, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>>>
As a first step, I noticed that a
Le 28/03/2013 19:32, Jeff Trawick a écrit :
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 25 March 2013, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
As a first step, I noticed that apr_itoa, apr_ltoa, apr_off_t_toa
could be tweaked to require less memory for some common cases.
The attached p
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> On Monday 25 March 2013, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>> As a first step, I noticed that apr_itoa, apr_ltoa, apr_off_t_toa
>> could be tweaked to require less memory for some common cases.
>> The attached patch reduces memory use for small val
On Monday 25 March 2013, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> As a first step, I noticed that apr_itoa, apr_ltoa, apr_off_t_toa
> could be tweaked to require less memory for some common cases.
> The attached patch reduces memory use for small values, that is to
> say for strings that fit in 8 bytes (inclu
Hi list,
I'm currently trying to reduce httpd memory footprint.
(http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@httpd.apache.org/msg56558.html)
On my test machine, processing a request requires about 15ko in the
'request' pool. I'm trying to reduce it to only use 8k which is the
minimum allocated on Linux
