On 01/25/2006 12:13 AM, Brian Akins wrote:
[..cut..]
> -a way to set max/min cache time that will override the expires header.
> Mostly just need max. probably not too hard.
I committed your patch regarding min expire time you sent a while ago to the
trunk
(r369811). It is correct that the
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
That sounds good, but thats more about the parts I haven't checked so far.
Sorry for nit picking on this, but you said that your patch will save disk
reads and syscalls and I still do not see this.
true. a header file almost always fits into the buffer of apr_file_t,
so
On 01/24/2006 06:27 PM, Brian Akins wrote:
> Plüm wrote:
>
>> To be honest I do not understand why Brian creates its own buffered
>> input / output reading. I think that header files are rarely larger
>> than 4K.
>> And the current code already buffers 4K when APR_BUFFERED is set as a
>> flag fo
Ian Holsman wrote:
5% is a pretty nice gain imho.
Unfortunately, it still lags behind our mod_cache equivalent by at least
20%. There is something fundamentally slow about mod_cache that I
cannot seem to put my finger on. Granted, ours is highly customized and
optimized, but I would expect
Plüm wrote:
To be honest I do not understand why Brian creates its own buffered
input / output reading. I think that header files are rarely larger than 4K.
And the current code already buffers 4K when APR_BUFFERED is set as a flag for
apr_file_open (which is set).
in current mod_disk_cache:
Ian Holsman wrote:
does anyone have any objections to this patch?
5% is a pretty nice gain imho.
if I don't see anything in the next couple of days I'll commit it.
me for one! I was just hoping to get some ideas flowing. This is not
meant to be for production.
--
Brian Akins
Lead Systems
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Ian Holsman
>
>
> Brian Akins wrote:
> > This is a rather nasty patch (sorry). Basically, it changes the way
> > arrays and tables are stored on disk. This allows us to do a much
> > cleaner and quicker read_array and read_table. It cuts down
> >
Brian Akins wrote:
This is a rather nasty patch (sorry). Basically, it changes the way
arrays and tables are stored on disk. This allows us to do a much
cleaner and quicker read_array and read_table. It cuts down
significantly on the number of disk reads for header files (one big one)
and t
This is a rather nasty patch (sorry). Basically, it changes the way
arrays and tables are stored on disk. This allows us to do a much
cleaner and quicker read_array and read_table. It cuts down
significantly on the number of disk reads for header files (one big one)
and the number of strdup'
