Actually, please do not disregard this question, it appears James and
I cannot correctly do bitwise arithmetic :)
Brian
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Brian Geffon wrote:
> Disregard this question, it's not doing what I originally expected it
> was doing based on the name.
>
> Brian
>
> On Wed,
Disregard this question, it's not doing what I originally expected it
was doing based on the name.
Brian
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Brian Geffon wrote:
> Hi,
> I was curious if anyone could shed some light on the following
> question I've had. So if I understand this correctly the freelists
Hi,
I was curious if anyone could shed some light on the following
question I've had. So if I understand this correctly the freelists use
the upper 16bits of the data ptr to be a "version," where this version
tries to solve several problems related to lockfree data structures
including the ABA prob
Wednesday, September 5, 2012, 4:16:42 PM, you wrote:
> Are all Doc structures of the same size?
Mostly, but you don't need their actual size, only the size of the content per
Doc instance, which is implicit in the fragment offset table. Given a range
request we can walk the fragment offset tabl
>
>
> No. The keys are computationally linked. Given a key for a fragment, the
> key for the next fragment is computed, not read.
OK, I think I found the way the next_key is computed from a given key.
> Therefore you can compute the key for fragment i from the key for fragment
> 0 without I/O.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012, 12:43:50 AM, you wrote:
> It seems ok to me. why not put it in the TS-1339, so that we all can
> reviews and test it.
On my list of things to do.
Wednesday, September 5, 2012, 3:54:03 AM, you wrote:
> Just for clarification: I did some tests and it seems the entries in the
> "alternate vector" stored in the first "Doc" are different versions of the
> same cached object?
Yes, see here:
http://trafficserver.apache.org/docs/trunk/sdk/http-hoo
>
> > 1. Is there a one to many relation between a cached object and a Doc
> > structure?
>
> Yes, that's the chained Docs in the lower right. Each Doc represents a
> fragment and we have discussed previously how objects are stored as an
> ordered set of fragments.
>
Just for clarification: I did
