You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Bill Stoddard <st...@raleigh.ibm.com> on 2001/08/14 22:03:06 UTC

Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/winnt mpm_winnt.c

> wrowe       01/08/14 12:42:54
>
>   Modified:    server/mpm/winnt mpm_winnt.c
>   Log:
>     Outch to Win9x... can't be destroying locks asymetrically.  Do we want
>     this lock on NT as well?  That's another question

yes, we definitely need qlock on NT.  We do not need jobmutex on NT though. There is a
fair amount of this kind of cleanup needed in the windows mpm that has been on my todo
list forever.  It is not broken, just not as clean as it could be.

Bill

Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/winnt mpm_winnt.c

Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.

From: "Bill Stoddard" <st...@raleigh.ibm.com>
To: <ne...@apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/winnt mpm_winnt.c


> > wrowe       01/08/14 12:42:54
> >
> >   Modified:    server/mpm/winnt mpm_winnt.c
> >   Log:
> >     Outch to Win9x... can't be destroying locks asymetrically.  Do we want
> >     this lock on NT as well?  That's another question
> 
> yes, we definitely need qlock on NT.  We do not need jobmutex on NT though. There is a
> fair amount of this kind of cleanup needed in the windows mpm that has been on my todo
> list forever.  It is not broken, just not as clean as it could be.

s/on NT /on Win9x /

my bad, sorry.  Of course we already do it for NT/W2k.  It's simply disabled on 9x.

Bill