LMPX.COM |
Home | Linux | Mysql | PHP | XML | ||
|
|
|||
From: Brian Shire Date: Fri Mar 28 14:31:55 2008 Subject: Re: [APC-DEV] 3.0.x vs. 3.1.x
On Mar 28, 2008, at 6:35 AM, Gopal V wrote: > Looks like the regression is in the memleak patches by shire. I didn't > pay enough attention when he committed it, but those leaks were > ignored > or rather left in-limbo because of past bugs. Other parts of > > http://news.php.net/php.pecl.cvs/10041 > > b0rks up this older "fix" :) > > http://cvs.php.net/viewvc.cgi/pecl/apc/apc_main.c?r1=3.98&r2=3.99 > > The order in which extensions are unloaded and the way they use > memory makes it really hard for APC to zero-copy data without > leaks - memcpy'ing opcodes into local memory is a huge perf-hit, > but the workaround with huge refcounts introduces such leaks. > > Maybe I should make it clearer in code. > Ah, thanks Gopal, I didn't realize callbacks where happening in the rshutdown's of other modules. If there where a hook into the function cleanup I assume it would be an easy fix to clean this up (although it's technically cosmetic only, but does help people spot *actual* new "leaks"). It seems like the classes could also have the same pitfalls if it happened to be used by the callback function, is this a possible issue or am missing something there? -shire
| Navigate in group php.apc.dev at sever news.php.net | |
| Previous | Next |
| © No Copyright You are free to use Anything |
Site Maintained by Zareef Ahmed
Powered By PHP Consultants |