[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: dso alternative

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_lyra.org>
Date: 2000-12-13 22:36:31 CET

On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 01:19:02PM -0600, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> Or, perhaps this whole idea of "sharing" already-loaded RA libraries
> is silly. Each process, when it needs an RA library, can just
> explicitly load it and keep a private copy of the vtable.
> I mean, don't modern operating systems just cache libraries once
> they're loaded? Don't they *expect* your processes to be sloppy and
> self-involved?

Each *process* must load a DSO itself. There isn't any way that you can
cache that. (and yes: the OS is smart about the second process' load)
Processes can't share the vtable either, since the ptrs are specific to that

[ the stuff can be shared among threads, though; forking is another can of
  worms... ]

Calling apr_dso_load() multiple times, within a process, for the same DSO
should be quite fine.

Were you talking processes?


Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:17 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.