Re: (ITS#3835) Lightweight Listener Thread

[slim@us.ibm.com]

> I've tested now with the new build, and it works correctly.  So I'm 
> guessing the ifdef's are not even needed, since things must always be 
> mutexed.
> 
> As for the results:
> 
> Search rate with patch: 868.232 ops/second
> Searchrate without patch:  910.171 ops/second
> 
> I.e., its faster without the patch for me on Solaris.  I've not yet 
tested 
> with it being compiled with the second flag set.

To find the cause of the performance degradation, I have thoroughly 
reanalyze the patch and found there is an expensive operation, 
WAKE_LISTENER in "slapd_resume". So I eliminated the operation in the 
patch.
The following patch has been tested and showed no performance degradation 
in my environment as before.
ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/sangseok-050711.diff

Sang-Seok