> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Kaluža [mailto:jkal...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 11. Dezember 2014 14:40
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Balancers, VirtualHost and ProxyPass
>
> On 12/11/2014 08:47 AM, Jan Kaluža wrote:
> > On 12/10/2014 08:21 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12/10/2014 02:21 PM, Jan Kaluža wrote:
> >>> On 12/10/2014 01:49 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group wrote:
> >>>> But this way we lose the base ones that are not touched in the
> >>>> virtual host and e.g. are only used by rewriterules.
> >>>> So we should transfer the base ones to the merged array in any case
> >>>> and update them where needed.
> >>>
> >>> Hm, you are right. Check the new version attached to this email.
> >>
> >> But this one changes the parent configuration. So if you have two
> >> virtual hosts and in each you change a different
> >> parameter of the parent the later one has *both* changes, not only
> >> one. So you would need to do a copy of these
> >> balancers first and adjust the copy. Then only add the adjusted copy
> >> to the result. For the base balancers not matching
> >> the override balancers just add them to the result untouched. Same for
> >> the override ones, as you already do
> >
> > That makes sense, thanks. I will work on it and send updated patch.
>
> I have to admit that this feature is starting to be more time-consuming
> than I thought :). The attached patch should address all the issues
> pointed by Yann and Rüdiger.
Looks fine in general. Details:
+ if (!tmp.lbmethod_set && b1->lbmethod_set) {
+ b2->lbmethod_set = b1->lbmethod_set;
+ b2->lbmethod = b1->lbmethod;
This is already the case because of the
+ *b2 = *b1;
above. So if lbmethod is set differently in overrides you lose it in favour of
the base setting.
+ PROXY_STRNCPY(tmp.s->lbpname, b1->s->lbpname);
+ }
+ if (!tmp.growth_set && b1->growth_set) {
+ b2->growth_set = b1->growth_set;
+ b2->growth = b1->growth;
Same as above
+ }
+ if (!tmp.failontimeout_set && b1->failontimeout_set) {
+ b2->failontimeout_set = b1->failontimeout_set;
+ b2->failontimeout = b1->failontimeout;
+ }
Same as above.
if (apr_is_empty_array(tmp.errstatuses)
+ && !apr_is_empty_array(b1->errstatuses)) {
+ apr_array_cat(b2->errstatuses, b1->errstatuses);
+ }
b1 and b2 point to the same array. So the result will be a doubled b1 if
apr_array_cat doesn't fail on getting supplied the same pointer twice :-)
Regards
Rüdiger
