On May 5, 2009, at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the
worker, why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and m
On May 5, 2009, at 4:41 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I think we need it for few reasons:
- When a worker is idle the information about its load is irrelevant.
Agreed... but I'm not sure how age affects this :)
- Being able to calculate throughput and load balance using that
informatio
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
@@ -1471,13 +1471,13 @@
PROXY_DECLARE(void)
ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer(apr_pool_t *pool, proxy_balancer
*balancer,
-proxy_worker *worker)
+proxy_worker
On 05/05/2009 10:41 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
>
> The next question is how do we call the ageing?
> - Via a thread that calls it after an elapsed time.
More accurate, but more complex.
> - When there is a request and the actual time is greater than the time
Less accurate, but less compl
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 3:02 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 1:18 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frede
On May 5, 2009, at 9:32 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the
worker, why not just the address?
If you looks to child
On May 5, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
@@ -1471,13 +1471,13 @@
PROXY_DECLARE(void)
ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer(apr_pool_t *pool, proxy_balancer
*balancer,
-proxy_worker *worker)
+proxy_worker **worker)
IMHO pro
On May 5, 2009, at 3:02 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 1:18 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I a
On 05/05/2009 07:15 PM, jfcl...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: jfclere
> Date: Tue May 5 17:15:48 2009
> New Revision: 771940
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=771940&view=rev
> Log:
> Change the order of mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer child_init().
> Change the balancer workers area to
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 1:18 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker->id and the scoreboard associ
On May 5, 2009, at 2:31 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
j...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Tue May 5 18:18:10 2009
New Revision: 771953
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/mod_ftp/trunk/docs/manual/mod/mod_ftp.html.en?rev=771953&r1=771952&r2=771953&view=diff
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
j...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: jim
> Date: Tue May 5 18:18:10 2009
> New Revision: 771953
>
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/mod_ftp/trunk/docs/manual/mod/mod_ftp.html.en?rev=771953&r1=771952&r2=771953&view=diff
> =
Just a quick note, it looks like fedora 10 (probably other flavors)
ship a borked lua package, see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499238
No apparent problem with mod_lua once liblua-5.1.so is correctly
bound to -lm.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On May 5, 2009, at 11:56 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> I'd like to work on a mod_ftp release to go along
>>> with the 2.2.12 release... I think baselining mod_ftp
>>> for only 2.2.x makes sense, and I'd really like to get a
>>> release out.
On May 5, 2009, at 1:18 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker->id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in
On May 5, 2009, at 11:56 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like to work on a mod_ftp release to go along
with the 2.2.12 release... I think baselining mod_ftp
for only 2.2.x makes sense, and I'd really like to get a
release out.
What's the status? I've done some prelim
On May 5, 2009, at 1:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker->id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in the reset() when using a b
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker->id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers need
a
On May 5, 2009, at 11:56 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like to work on a mod_ftp release to go along
with the 2.2.12 release... I think baselining mod_ftp
for only 2.2.x makes sense, and I'd really like to get a
release out.
What's the status? I've done some prelim
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker->id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers
need a different handling i
I've been using it as fallback when I can't conenct to mine via webdav.
So far it's working ok, even vhosts but thats still a bit tricky but
works non-the-less.
I'd love to see it included for a 2.2.x but 2.4.x would be nice aswel.
~Jorge
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 5:56 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
w
Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> If it exports any raw functions (instead of using external hook or
> optional function apis), I think the code should be fixed.
I'm not even clear that folks issues with the mod_watchdog API were
ever addressed, or if this should be set aside from the next release
while so
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker->id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers
need a different handling i
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:58 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
wrote:
> Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >
> > but LoadModule mod_watchdog falls after other modules. Now I don't
> > recall
> > precisely how Jeff worked out the MPM hooks, and am too tired to
> > work it out
> > just at this moment
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker->id and the scoreboard associated logic
moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers need a
different handling if we want to have a shared information area for them.
T
Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> but LoadModule mod_watchdog falls after other modules. Now I don't
> recall
> precisely how Jeff worked out the MPM hooks, and am too tired to
> work it out
> just at this moment, but would renaming this config3.m4 work out this
> ordering issue?
>
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I'd like to work on a mod_ftp release to go along
> with the 2.2.12 release... I think baselining mod_ftp
> for only 2.2.x makes sense, and I'd really like to get a
> release out.
>
> What's the status? I've done some prelim tests and they
> look good.
See STATUS?
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker->id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers need
a different handling if we want to have a shared information area
for them.
The thing is that t
I'd like to work on a mod_ftp release to go along
with the 2.2.12 release... I think baselining mod_ftp
for only 2.2.x makes sense, and I'd really like to get a
release out.
What's the status? I've done some prelim tests and they
look good.
Mladen Turk wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker,
why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() i
On May 5, 2009, at 9:32 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the
worker, why not just the address?
If you looks to child
On May 5, 2009, at 9:32 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the
worker, why not just the address?
If you looks to child
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker,
why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and mod_
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 4:12 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> wr...@apache.org wrote:
> > Author: wrowe
> > Date: Tue May 5 06:23:29 2009
> > New Revision: 771579
> >
> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=771579&view=rev
> > Log:
> > MPM's are now dynamically loadable; so must mod_watchdog be
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker,
why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer we
see that
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker,
why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer we
see that mod_proxy initialise
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: jean-frederic clere
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 5. Mai 2009 10:46
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: mod_proxy / mod_proxy_balancer
>
> Hi,
>
> There are 2 weird things in the logic.
As you say the logic is weird and IMHO this needs serious
reconstruct
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker, why
not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer we see
that mod_proxy initialise one copy and mod_proxy_balancer the other, it
is working b
wr...@apache.org wrote:
> Author: wrowe
> Date: Tue May 5 06:23:29 2009
> New Revision: 771579
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=771579&view=rev
> Log:
> MPM's are now dynamically loadable; so must mod_watchdog be.
>
> The only module with an excuse now is mod_so which implements
> LoadM
39 matches
Mail list logo
