On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 1:06 PM, poir...@apache.org wrote:
Author: poirier
Date: Thu Oct 29 17:06:15 2009
New Revision: 831031
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=831031view=rev
Log:
Merge r823536, r823563 from trunk:
mod_cache: add Cache-control: s-maxage to cacheability decisions per
Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 1:06 PM, poir...@apache.org wrote:
Author: poirier
Date: Thu Oct 29 17:06:15 2009
New Revision: 831031
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=831031view=rev
Log:
Merge r823536, r823563 from trunk:
...
Reviewed by: poirier
With all the discussion of mod_fcgid lately (I admit, I did not read all
the
threads, so forgive me if we already discussed this), I was wondering if a
different approach would be better.
I know at one time there was work on a mod_proxy_fastcgi. The current
trend
in other webservers seems
There has been some interest expressed on this list from the mod_fcgid
user community to manage processes differently (e.g., independent of
load); in general, I'd like to see the proxy+process mgr solution
support requirements that would otherwise twist mod_fcgid in new
directions.
I
Kamesh Jayachandran wrote:
Do you have session caching disabled in the server configuration, either
accidentally or deliberately? That seems to me to be the only thing
that fits
the tcpdump you sent.
If so please turn session caching on and try the SSL_OP_NO_TICKET patch
again.
I am away
On 10/30/09 1:29 PM, Albert Lash albert.l...@docunext.com wrote:
But in the end, it is awesome for containing memory leaks and
automatically re-spawning fastcgi processes.
An external process-manager can do the same.
My point was do we really want/need this complexity inside httpd?
Also, the
On 10/30/2009 01:18 PM, Dan Poirier wrote:
Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 1:06 PM, poir...@apache.org wrote:
Author: poirier
Date: Thu Oct 29 17:06:15 2009
New Revision: 831031
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=831031view=rev
Log:
Merge r823536,
On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 14:59 +1100, Bojan Smojver wrote:
Of course, SIGINT plucked out of thin air.
Actually, we can just reuse WORKER_SIGNAL for all this.
--
Bojan
--- httpd-2.2.14-v/server/mpm/worker/worker.c 2007-07-18 00:48:25.0 +1000
+++ httpd-2.2.14/server/mpm/worker/worker.c
