notes table? Re: [SUBMIT] mod_gzip 2.0.26a ( Non-debug version )

[Brian Pane <bp...@pacbell.net>]

Cliff Woolley wrote:

[...]

>[Light comes on] Ahhh... guess I should have looked more closely at
>mod_log_config and I would have realized that you can configure it to
>write certain notes to the log file.  Duh.  My fault.
>
Wasn't the concensus a while back that request_rec->notes should be
removed, because the more efficient 'userdata' functions on r->pool
had made the notes table obsolete?

--Brian

Re: notes table? (was Re: [SUBMIT] mod_gzip 2.0.26a)

[Brian Pane <bp...@pacbell.net>]

Cliff Woolley wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Brian Pane wrote:
>
>>Wasn't the concensus a while back that request_rec->notes should be
>>removed, because the more efficient 'userdata' functions on r->pool
>>had made the notes table obsolete?
>>
>
>Yeah, I believe that was the case.
>
>You should be able to get this same functionality out of mod_log_config
>even if the data is stored in r->pool's userdata, right?  The user
>explicitly tells us what the key name is that they want logged, so we
>should be good to go.
>
Right; the paradigm still works, just with a different data structure .

--Brian

Re: notes table? (was Re: [SUBMIT] mod_gzip 2.0.26a)

[Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>]

On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Brian Pane wrote:

> Wasn't the concensus a while back that request_rec->notes should be
> removed, because the more efficient 'userdata' functions on r->pool
> had made the notes table obsolete?

Yeah, I believe that was the case.

You should be able to get this same functionality out of mod_log_config
even if the data is stored in r->pool's userdata, right?  The user
explicitly tells us what the key name is that they want logged, so we
should be good to go.

--Cliff

--------------------------------------------------------------
   Cliff Woolley
   cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
   Charlottesville, VA