Re: [boost] [thread] patch to allow custom stack size.

Subject: Re: [boost] [thread] patch to allow custom stack size.
From: Brett Lentz (blentz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-30 14:10:14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/30/2011 01:11 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
> Le 30/11/11 17:13, Brett Lentz a écrit :
>> 
>> Patch and (very) rudimentary usage example is attached.
>> 
>> A couple months ago, I sent mail to the list looking to see if
>> there's interest in getting some patches merged from Phusion
>> Passenger. (See: http://marc.info/?t=131722868200003&r=1&w=2 )
>> 
>> So, here's the first patch I'd like to try to get committed. On 
>> pthread-based systems, it allows for the user to request a
>> custom stack size.
>> 
>> This is useful in Passenger's case where they want to reduce the
>> VM size without requiring the user to hassle with ulimit
>> settings. Passenger spawns many threads rather than using a
>> thread pool for performance reasons. As a result of this design
>> decision, they also need the ability to tune the stack size.
>> 
>> Ticket #5956 already exists for this patch. I've verified that
>> the patch works against the current (1.49) codebase out of SVN.
>> 
>> What next steps need to be taken before this is committed?
>> 
>> 
>> 
> Hi,
> 
> I don't know. I have submitted a more generic patch *3 years* ago
> and there is no response yet. 
> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2741 :proposal to manage 
> portable and non portable thread attributes
> 
> Btw, could you take a look at the ticket and tell me what do you
> think of my proposal?
> 
> Best, Vicente
> 

I can definitely see the benefit to a more generic solution. I'm not
opposed to it in principle.

Unfortunately, I'm probably not the best person to comment on the pros
and cons of your patch versus the one I'm pushing. My skills in C++
are pretty poor. I'm mostly acting as a liaison and steward for these
patches. I'm trying to facilitate allowing Passenger to compile
against a non-forked version of Boost. To do that, there's a few key
elements of their fork that need to be merged into the upstream Boost.

So, the sooner I can get movement on this, the better.

- -- 

- ---Brett.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO1n+WAAoJEEAzW/nB31+3SMQH/jmXVVAFTiDAAU0kgev3onJA
DusPsBxP3gDUWYnkZ/9gAZ/B0LnSr8Bbxu/QQYrqsQxtEigVXtS3mlcIfTyfFYoQ
7S7aDRwR/SgKS+doGkHNQ3Y8+xQP3ly9bTdT5zDl9lU8CAY0uPkONIAhnRQJalne
X2Sj+9lLSJt7EMKnTwtqrJaciIUE3pLC0LDkjn0GrB33kSTU5N8GFr7UvAYoqBXr
DU2CKNQM7Nacuoh2XUdwZzHWOlfRTuEmAdbMlqAEIOinNsL23rIAVCMVd8ZPrSF6
g1CZ4WiLmpbKM2vykAspTn8szfxdrlg3XQhMspYECzV7pQ5OHR7XFHireM74WcM=
=40+3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----