On Tue, 16 Aug 2005, Jim Gallacher wrote:
What is the correct name for the tarball?
mod_python-3.2.0-b.tgz, mod_python-3.2.0-BETA.tgz or something else?
I like mod_python-3.2.0b and the tarball would be mod_python-3.2.0b.tgz
Grisha
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 10:44:11PM -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
We'd certainly sacrifice some speed under these circumstances; but it'd
perhaps be better than nothing and would avoid the possibility where we
serve
content that is now excluded. -- justin
IMO, this is why we should revive
Paul Querna wrote:
Joshua Slive wrote:
[What is the active mod_mbox devel list? Trying [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is the best list.
As the subject says, mod_mbox has seg faulted about 50 times so far
today on ajax. Some core files in ajax:/tmp (after hacking apachectl to
adjust
This patch allows one to override the values of some headers so that they
vary to the same value.
Config Example:
#all lines that have gzip set one variable
SetEnvIf Accept-Encoding gzip gzip=1
#browsers that have problems with gzip
BrowserMatch MSIE [1-3] gzip=0
BrowserMatch MSIE [1-5].*Mac
Akins, Brian wrote:
This patch allows one to override the values of some headers so that they
vary to the same value.
CacheOverrideHeader Accept-Encoding gzip
CacheOverrideHeader User-Agent gzip
Very useful looking. I suggest CacheVaryOverride as a much more clear
and precise name.
--On August 17, 2005 1:10:22 PM -0400 Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Justin... Would it be possible for you to try this out on ajax. I could
try to do it myself, but I would need to replicate your setup.
I don't think the core dumps are creating any real problem, but I hate to
see them
The current 2.1 mod_disk_cache allows any number of workers to be actively
trying to cache the same object. This is because of the use of
apr_file_mktemp.
This patch makes the tempfiles the same per cache object rather than
random. I basically added a temp_file() that mimics data_file() and
--On August 17, 2005 3:01:03 PM -0400 Akins, Brian
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This patch allows one to override the values of some headers so that they
vary to the same value.
Config Example:
# all lines that have gzip set one variable
SetEnvIf Accept-Encoding gzip gzip=1
# browsers that have
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
The concept is fine. (And as Joshua pointed out 'CacheVaryOverride'
would be a better name.)
I'm not attatched to the name. So that sounds good to me.
A few issues with the implementation (modulo style nits)...
This was all done in a few hours today, including
Akins, Brian wrote:
The current 2.1 mod_disk_cache allows any number of workers to be actively
trying to cache the same object. This is because of the use of
apr_file_mktemp.
This patch makes the tempfiles the same per cache object rather than
random. I basically added a temp_file() that
Graham Leggett wrote:
This is very cool. On my list of things to do was to handle something
similar for serving from the cache as well - again to avoid a thundering
herd against backend servers while a file is being cached.
I have the thought that we could also serve files that have
Graham Leggett wrote:
The disk cache might be a
bit more involved, but the idea would be the same.
Only way I can think of this is to keep trying to seek until file gets
renamed. Maybe not very efficient.
Or maybe a hash/queue/something that kept track of in-flight objects.
But, this
Brian Akins wrote:
Only way I can think of this is to keep trying to seek until file gets
renamed. Maybe not very efficient.
Thing is, compared to the total hits to a server, those hits that were
slightly less efficient while serving an in flight object would be a
tiny fraction of the
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 04:13:37PM -0400, Brian Akins wrote:
Graham Leggett wrote:
The disk cache might be a
bit more involved, but the idea would be the same.
Only way I can think of this is to keep trying to seek until file gets
renamed. Maybe not very efficient.
Why bother renaming
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
Why bother renaming the file for such an implementation? If a
half-cached file can be served from, and this handled properly, the
rename would no longer make any sense :)
True.
But like Graham said, ultimately, I don't think it's worth it.
Not to be biased, but I
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 04:33:24PM -0400, Brian Akins wrote:
True.
But like Graham said, ultimately, I don't think it's worth it.
I got the opposite from what Graham said, but may have mis-read.
Not to be biased, but I think my idea of serving recently expired
objects would also avoid the
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 04:33:24PM -0400, Brian Akins wrote:
True.
But like Graham said, ultimately, I don't think it's worth it.
I got the opposite from what Graham said, but may have mis-read.
Or i did...
Depends on the environment. For a proxy, being able
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 04:11:01PM -0400, Brian Akins wrote:
I have the thought that we could also serve files that have recently
expired (recent being configurable) if the object was being cached.
Psudocode:
if(expired (now - recent)) {
Content definitely should not be served from the
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
ie revalidate the cache content after N-seconds before it is due to be
expired would have the same effect, but avoid serving stale content.
Does that make sense?
Yes. cool. +1.
Thanks!
--
Brian Akins
Lead Systems Engineer
CNN Internet Technologies
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 04:11:01PM -0400, Brian Akins wrote:
I have the thought that we could also serve files that have recently
expired (recent being configurable) if the object was being cached.
Psudocode:
if(expired (now - recent)) {
Content
--On August 17, 2005 9:52:32 PM +0100 Colm MacCarthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Content definitely should not be served from the cache after it has
expired imo. However I think an approach like;
if((now + interval) expired) {
if(!stat(tmpfile)) {
At 07:29 AM 8/15/2005, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:50:14PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
It can't reliably disable caching for a directory.
Proxy has a mechanism to do this, cache should have a similar mechanism.
Does CacheDisable not do this?
That's per-location,
--On August 17, 2005 9:29:05 PM +0100 Colm MacCarthaigh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Why bother renaming the file for such an implementation? If a
half-cached file can be served from, and this handled properly, the
rename would no longer make any sense :)
For a disk cache it would be tricky to
In a message dated 8/17/2005 2:01:41 PM Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
CacheOverrideHeader Accept-Encoding gzip CacheOverrideHeader User-Agent gzip
This would allow all browsers that send "Accept-Encoding: gzip" and do not match the BrowserMatches to be mapped to the same
Just a heads up, I am planning to RM and tag 2.1.7 (and re-branch from
trunk the 2.2.x branch) on Friday or Saturday this week. I intend to
include APR and APR-Util 1.2.1 with this release.
As long as 2.1.7 seems good, I would like to do a vote on making it a Beta.
Thanks,
-Paul
25 matches
Mail list logo
