Re: Possible bug with a 206 Partial Response
alrightly, back again. The problem is that Apache::Registry will return
a 206, which will trigger the error message. In case there is anyone
out there as daft as me :), the crude delegation-type module below can
solve this problem. Maniacs who see a need to return 204's, etc can
probably extend this to a more general solution. :)
package MyPrefix::Apache::Registry;
use strict;
BEGIN {
use Apache::Registry();
use Apache::Constants qw(:common);
use constant PARTIAL_CONTENT = 206;
}
sub handler {
my ($return) = Apache::Registry::handler(@_);
if ($return == PARTIAL_CONTENT) {
return OK;
} else {
return ($return);
}
}
END { }
1;
Uru
-Dave
Ged Haywood wrote:
Hi again,
On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, David Dick wrote:
not even getting a broken connection. So somehow mod_perl doesn't
_really_ think it's an error.
Check out DEBUGGING in 'perldoc Apache::Registry'.
Apache::Registry won't always return what you'd think it should.
This has snookered more than one in the past...
73,
Ged.
Re: Possible bug with a 206 Partial Response
David Dick wrote:
alrightly, back again. The problem is that Apache::Registry will return
a 206, which will trigger the error message. In case there is anyone
out there as daft as me :), the crude delegation-type module below can
solve this problem. Maniacs who see a need to return 204's, etc can
probably extend this to a more general solution. :)
package MyPrefix::Apache::Registry;
use strict;
BEGIN {
use Apache::Registry();
use Apache::Constants qw(:common);
use constant PARTIAL_CONTENT = 206;
}
sub handler {
my ($return) = Apache::Registry::handler(@_);
if ($return == PARTIAL_CONTENT) {
return OK;
} else {
return ($return);
}
}
END { }
1;
When I've tried to run your test script under ModPerl::Registry
(mp2.0) I was surprised to learn that it worked just fine. So far I
was fixing the porting bugs ;) I've added your test script to the
ModPerl::Registry test suite.
We better fix it in the 1.0 core. But before that we need to be clear of how
the return codes should be handled, because the currect three implementations
all diverge when it comes to handling the return codes/execution status.
In order to simplify the logic, assuming that the script was
successfully executed and inlining some code, the 3 different registry
implementations resemble the following:
Apache::Registry does:
my $old_status = $r-status;
eval { {$cv}($r, @_) };
return $r-status($old_status);
Apache::PerlRun/RegistryNG do:
my $old_status = $r-status;
eval { {$cv}($r, @_) };
$r-status($old_status);
return OK;
ModPerl::RegistryCooker does:
# handlers shouldn't set $r-status but return it
my $old_status = $self-[REQ]-status;
eval { {$cv}($r, @_) };
my $new_status = $self-[REQ]-status;
# only if the script has changed the status, reset to the old
# status and return the new status
return $old_status != $new_status
? $self-[REQ]-status($old_status)
: OK;
If I'm correct both Apache::PerlRun and Apache::Registry will have
problems in certain situations if we agree that ModPerl::Registry has
the correct logic for handling the execution status. If you can tell
otherwise please give me a test script that doesn't work under
ModPerl::Registry.
But in your particular example, Dick, if you configure the
script to run under Apache::RegistryNG, does it work? If not, that's where the
difference between 1.0 and 2.0 lays: ModPerl::Registry doesn't reset status if
it wasn't changed by the script.
__
Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Possible bug with a 206 Partial Response
If I'm correct both Apache::PerlRun and Apache::Registry will have problems in certain situations if we agree that ModPerl::Registry has the correct logic for handling the execution status. If you can tell otherwise please give me a test script that doesn't work under ModPerl::Registry. But in your particular example, Dick, if you configure the I'm presuming that you simply mixed up which is my first name and surname? :) Usually dave is fine. :) script to run under Apache::RegistryNG, does it work? No. If not, that's where the difference between 1.0 and 2.0 lays: ModPerl::Registry doesn't reset status if it wasn't changed by the script. well the ModPerl::Registry behaviour certainly suits my program. :) Uru -dave
Re: Possible bug with a 206 Partial Response
Hi there, On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, David Dick wrote: Got a bit of a weird set of behaviour with a mod_perl Apache::Registry type script. [snip] More information about this error may be available in the server error log.P [snip] Anyone got any ideas? What does it say in the error_log? 73, Ged.
Re: Possible bug with a 206 Partial Response
Good Point. Forgot to mention that the error log is completely empty. :) Ged Haywood wrote: Hi there, On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, David Dick wrote: Got a bit of a weird set of behaviour with a mod_perl Apache::Registry type script. [snip] More information about this error may be available in the server error log.P [snip] Anyone got any ideas? What does it say in the error_log? 73, Ged.
Re: Possible bug with a 206 Partial Response
Hi there, On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, David Dick wrote: Forgot to mention that the error log is completely empty. :) Are you getting core dumps? 73, Ged.
Re: Possible bug with a 206 Partial Response
not even getting a broken connection. So somehow mod_perl doesn't _really_ think it's an error. Ged Haywood wrote: Hi there, On Sun, 2 Feb 2003, David Dick wrote: Forgot to mention that the error log is completely empty. :) Are you getting core dumps? 73, Ged.
Re: Possible bug with a 206 Partial Response
Hi again, On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, David Dick wrote: not even getting a broken connection. So somehow mod_perl doesn't _really_ think it's an error. Check out DEBUGGING in 'perldoc Apache::Registry'. Apache::Registry won't always return what you'd think it should. This has snookered more than one in the past... 73, Ged.
