Hi, I've checked out the latest version from CVS, but I see there's no configure script in there. How do I get/generate it ? Do I need it to compile ?
Thanx, Peter. Brian Pane wrote: > > Peter Van Biesen wrote: > > >I've continued to investigate the problem, maybe you know what could > >cause it. > > > >I'm using a proxy chain, a proxy running internally and forwarding all > >requests to an other proxy in the DMZ. Both proxies are identical. It is > >always the internal proxy that crashes; the external proxy has no > >problem downloading large files ( I haven't tested the memory usage yet > >). Therefor, when the proxy connects directly to the site, the memory is > >freed, but when it forwards the request to another proxy, it is not. > > > >Anyhow, I'll wait until the 2.0.41 will be released, maybe this will > >solve the problem. Does anybody know when this will be ? > > > > There's no specific date planned for 2.0.41 yet. My own thinking > is that we should release 2.0.41 "soon," because it contains a few > important performance and reliability fixes (mostly related to cases > where 2.0.40 and prior releases were trying to buffer unreasonably > large amounts of data). In the meantime, if you have time, can you > try your proxy test case against the current CVS head? I ran some > reverse-proxy tests successfully today using the latest 2.0.41-dev > code, and it properly streamed large responses without buffering, > but I'm not certain that my test case covered all the code paths > involved in your two-proxy setup. > > Thanks, > Brian > > > > >Peter. > > > >Graham Leggett wrote: > > > > > >>Brian Pane wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>But the memory involved here ought to be in buckets (which can > >>>be freed long before the entire request is done). > >>> > >>>In 2.0.39 and 2.0.40, the content-length filter's habit of > >>>buffering the entire response would keep the httpd from freeing > >>>buckets incrementally during the request. That particular > >>>problem is gone in the latest 2.0.41-dev CVS head. If the > >>>segfault problem still exists in 2.0.41-dev, we need to take > >>>a look at whether there's any buffering in the proxy code that > >>>can be similarly fixed. > >>> > >>> > >>The proxy code doesn't buffer anything, it basically goes "get a bucket > >>from backend stack, put the bucket to frontend stack, cleanup bucket, > >>repeat". > >> > >>There are some filters (like include I think) that "put away" buckets as > >>the response is handled, it is possible one of these filters is also > >>causing a "leak". > >> > >>Regards, > >>Graham > >>-- > >>----------------------------------------- > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> "There's a moon > >> over Bourbon Street > >> tonight..." > >> > >>
