Re: on fopen() vs. open()

[Randy Terbush <ra...@zyzzyva.com>]

> >        Note -- I proposed replacing FILE * with BUFF *.. which does
> >the buffering and you don't have the nasty performance hit.
> >        I wouldn't dare propose replacing all FILE * with pure fd's.
> 
> Sorry, but this won't fix the problem. Even if you remove all references
> to FILE from the Apache code, it is still used inside the libc library, and
> will still cause problems.
> 
> The solution is to simply not use so many log files. I thought the group
> had already concluded that this wasn't an optimal configuration.
> 
>   David.

Sorry, but from my perspective it *is* an optimal configuration.

I provide services for "web developers". As part of that service
I provide each with their own error_log and access_log that is
*current*. Not processed 24 hours or even an hour later.

An "exploder" has been suggested which could possibly help this
situation, but adds a potential problem if this extra logging
process dies, which is not currently an issue.

I've suggested that we open and close the error_log for each
access. This would *help* the situation but obviously not
solve it.

I like the idea of getting Sun to fix this... :-)