Date: 07 Aug 1998 16:06:09 +0200 From: dag-erli@ifi.uio.no (Dag-Erling Coidan =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= ) To: Mark Huizer <freebsd@xaa.iae.nl> Cc: Tom <tom@uniserve.com>, Dusk Auriel Sykotik <syko@sykotik.org>, Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, dg@root.com, narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: memory leaks in libc Message-ID: <xzpemusopim.fsf@hrotti.ifi.uio.no> In-Reply-To: Mark Huizer's message of "Fri, 7 Aug 1998 15:47:21 %2B0200" References: <19980806181215.A7652@xaa.iae.nl> <Pine.BSF.3.96.980806093206.222C-100000@shell.uniserve.ca> <19980807154721.A865@xaa.iae.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark Huizer <freebsd@xaa.iae.nl> writes: > OK, how come a poor little apache server doesn't like this: > > GET / HTTP/1.0 > User-Agent: a > User-Agent: aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa > (repeat last 2 lines 20000 times) > (empty line) > > apache on a Linux machine here is still thinking about wheterh or not to > return 100M, time to test it on my home FreeBSD server :-) So maybe it's time to switch to thttpd. Seriously, Apache should not rely on getenv() / setenv(). It should instead build an array of environment variables which it then passes to execvt(). Self-starting dynamically sized arrays (and strings) are easy enouugh to write, and if you use an exponential growth function the performance impact is negligible (in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be a lot faster than getenv() / setenv()) DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - dag-erli@ifi.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpemusopim.fsf>