Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.2.10

2008-10-12 Thread Ruediger Pluem
On 10/10/2008 04:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Based on the positive feedback on the test tarballs, I'd like to start a vote on releasing 2.2.10. I'm looking to release on Tuesday, since I'll be traveling Monday, so I'll close the vote on Tues AM. +1 for release. Tested on Solaris 8 32

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.2.10

2008-10-12 Thread Sander Temme
On Oct 11, 2008, at 6:12 PM, Sander Temme wrote: SunOS solaris10 5.10 Generic_137112-02 i86pc i386 i86pc (in addition, tested SSL functionality with the nCipher plugin and OpenSSL 0.9.8i from Sunfreeware, with positive result) Oh yeah, I forgot. Used gcc by virtue of not bothering to

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.2.10

2008-10-12 Thread Mladen Turk
Jim Jagielski wrote: Based on the positive feedback on the test tarballs, I'd like to start a vote on releasing 2.2.10. I'm looking to release on Tuesday, since I'll be traveling Monday, so I'll close the vote on Tues AM. -1 Doesn't build on Windows. apr-util included doesn't include the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.2.10

2008-10-12 Thread Mladen Turk
Mladen Turk wrote: Jim Jagielski wrote: Based on the positive feedback on the test tarballs, I'd like to start a vote on releasing 2.2.10. I'm looking to release on Tuesday, since I'll be traveling Monday, so I'll close the vote on Tues AM. -1 Doesn't build on Windows. apr-util included

Re: Speeding up mod_proxy_balancer on Windows

2008-10-12 Thread Jess Holle
I've managed to create a workaround for this issue with GetTcpTable(). The only remaining issue I have is that I don't want to call this too often. I want to hold on to the data with a time-to-live during which I'll assume the data has not changed. That's all easy enough except for locking.

Re: Speeding up mod_proxy_balancer on Windows

2008-10-12 Thread Matt Stevenson
Hi, Send this to the wrong address first time. May have saved the GetTcpTable coding. Here is a usec timeout fix, although I wouldn't go below 100 milliseconds without some testing under load. I'm not sure its the perfect way to do it, but it avoids changing the connectiontimeout parameter

Re: Speeding up mod_proxy_balancer on Windows

2008-10-12 Thread Jess Holle
Perhaps I misunderstand things here, but isn't this connection timeout setting used for more than just the timing out the initial formation of the connection? It would seem that logical that there would be a connection timeout for forming the initial connection and another for timeouts of

Re: Speeding up mod_proxy_balancer on Windows

2008-10-12 Thread Ruediger Pluem
On 10/13/2008 12:50 AM, Jess Holle wrote: Perhaps I misunderstand things here, but isn't this connection timeout setting used for more than just the timing out the initial formation of the connection? It would seem that logical that there would be a connection timeout for forming the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.2.10

2008-10-12 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Mladen Turk wrote: -1 Doesn't build on Windows. apr-util included doesn't include the backport of r667437, so it break compiles with nasty warnings .\dbd\apr_dbd.c(101) : warning C4013: 'apu_dso_init' undefined .\dbd\apr_dbd.c(148) : warning C4013: 'apu_dso_mutex_lock' undefined

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.2.10

2008-10-12 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
Mladen Turk wrote: Oops. Wrong archive file (used 2.2.9 instead 2.2.10) Builds fine, so +1 Windows 32 Windows 64 Same here; +1 - .zip and .msi including 0.9.8i will be along shortly. Sorry for the noise :) And I need to read entire threads :)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache HTTP server 2.2.10

2008-10-12 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Mladen Turk wrote: Oops. Wrong archive file (used 2.2.9 instead 2.2.10) Builds fine, so +1 Windows 32 Windows 64 Same here; +1 - .zip and .msi including 0.9.8i will be along shortly. .msi*'s to direct at /dist/httpd/binaries/win32/, -symbols.zip*'s to direct at