httpd-test-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)" <>
Subject RE: [PATCH] Use mutex locks in mod_specweb99.c
Date Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:25:17 GMT
Oh.. I was trying to use the default apr behaviour for mutex locking.. I
don't think I had the process-shared mutexes enabled.. I'll probably give it
a try (and eliminate the _[rw]lock) and see if it works better..

I'll also look around and see if somebody has already done a performance
analysis for using flocks() vs process shared mutexes for HP-UX, and see if
we can get performance difference..


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sander Temme []
>Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 10:17 AM
>To: test dev; MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use mutex locks in mod_specweb99.c
>> I started seeing the following errors in the specweb99 run 
>output, when I
>> use mod_specweb99.c with Apache 2.0.43 and worker MPM. The 
>following patch
>> seems to get rid of the problem. If you're thinking that it 
>may degrade the
>> response - I did not find much difference though.
>> Can somebody please evaluate and let me know if it's okay ?.
>Ha! I have seen this too but have had no time to even think 
>about working on
>I have one question. Your patch mutexes out the acquisition of the file
>lock. Do these thread mutexes apply only within the process, or across
>processes as well? In the latter case, we could do away with the flock
>entirely if we're in a multithreaded environment. In that case the #ifs
>would move to the _dolock function and we'd have an _unlock 
>function with
>its own #ifs.
>Covalent Technologies                   
>Engineering group                                Voice: (415) 856 4214
>303 Second Street #375 South                       Fax: (415) 856 4210
>San Francisco CA 94107
>   PGP Fingerprint: 7A8D B189 E871 80CB 9521  9320 C11E 7B47 964F 31D9
>This email message is for the sole use of the intended 
>recipient(s) and may
>contain confidential and privileged information. Any 
>unauthorized review,
>use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not 
>the intended
>recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and 
>destroy all copies
>of the original message

View raw message