+1
I like the generic API direction, and extending it to support other existing
controls in favor of a different API for each.
On Wednesday, October 13, 2021, 09:16:40 AM PDT, Leif Hedstrom
<[email protected]> wrote:
Anyone have any thoughts on this? If not, lazy consensus will apply and I’ll
pick one (which would be to promote TSHttpTxnCntl() and deprecate the
overlapping APIs).
— Leif
> On Oct 5, 2021, at 7:40 AM, Leif Hedstrom <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> While poking around, looking for a way to turn off logging for a single
> transaction (to effectively sample logging activity), I stumbled upon this
> API in experimental.h:
>
> tsapi TSReturnCode TSHttpTxnCntl(TSHttpTxn txnp, TSHttpCntlType cntl, void
> *data);
>
>
> The intent here was obviously to create a single, generic API to control
> various behavior of a transaction. It currently only supports two such
> controls:
>
> * Enabling / disabling logging (sm->t_state.api_info.logging_enabled)
> * Retry intercept failures (sm->t_state.api_info.retry_intercept_failures)
>
>
> There is currently no use of either of these in the core, except that the Lua
> plugin supports both. I need the first one of these, and I see two options:
>
> 1. Promote TSHttpTxnCntl() from experimental to stable (i.e. move from
>experimental -> ts.h). This API is very old, it’s likely been here forever.
>
> 2. Deprecate TSHttpTxnCntl(), and create two new APIs for Set() and Get()
>of these respective “controls”.
>
>
> I’m ok either way, but I think that if we promote TSHttpTxnCntl() to stable,
> we should also consider deprecating the following APIs, and add the as
> controls for TSHttpTxnCntl() instead:
>
>
> tsapi void TSHttpTxnRespCacheableSet(TSHttpTxn txnp, int flag);
> tsapi void TSHttpTxnReqCacheableSet(TSHttpTxn txnp, int flag);
> tsapi TSReturnCode TSHttpTxnServerRespNoStoreSet(TSHttpTxn txnp, int
>flag); // Maybe ??
> tsapi void TSHttpTxnDebugSet(TSHttpTxn txnp, int on);
> tsapi void TSHttpSsnDebugSet(TSHttpSsn ssnp, int on); // Maybe ??
> tsapi void TSSkipRemappingSet(TSHttpTxn txnp, int flag);
>
>
> If we do that, adding more of these controls (on/off) toggles to the API
> would be done through TSHttpTxnCntl().
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
> — Leif
