You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de> on 2011/12/04 17:01:43 UTC
Slotmem/socache module names vs. provider names
mod_slotmem_plain "plain"
mod_slotmem_shm "shared" !
mod_socache_dbm "dbm"
mod_socache_dc "dc"
mod_socache_memcache "mc" !
mod_socache_shmcb "shmcb"
Should we align the provider names with the module names? E.g. change
"shared" to "shm" and "mc" to "memcache"?
Re: Slotmem/socache module names vs. provider names
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Dec 4, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> mod_slotmem_plain "plain"
> mod_slotmem_shm "shared" !
>
> mod_socache_dbm "dbm"
> mod_socache_dc "dc"
> mod_socache_memcache "mc" !
> mod_socache_shmcb "shmcb"
>
> Should we align the provider names with the module names? E.g. change "shared" to "shm" and "mc" to "memcache"?
>
+1
Re: Slotmem/socache module names vs. provider names
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 12/4/2011 10:01 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> mod_slotmem_plain "plain"
> mod_slotmem_shm "shared" !
>
> mod_socache_dbm "dbm"
> mod_socache_dc "dc"
> mod_socache_memcache "mc" !
> mod_socache_shmcb "shmcb"
>
> Should we align the provider names with the module names? E.g. change "shared" to "shm"
> and "mc" to "memcache"?
And can we just call a shm a shm, even if it was a shmcb variant?
+1
Re: Slotmem/socache module names vs. provider names
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 04 Dec 2011, at 6:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> mod_slotmem_plain "plain"
> mod_slotmem_shm "shared" !
>
> mod_socache_dbm "dbm"
> mod_socache_dc "dc"
> mod_socache_memcache "mc" !
> mod_socache_shmcb "shmcb"
>
> Should we align the provider names with the module names? E.g. change "shared" to "shm" and "mc" to "memcache"?
Yes please.
Regards,
Graham
--