Re: mod_cache: store_body() bites off more than it can chew

2010-09-13 Thread Paul Fee
Graham Leggett wrote: On 06 Sep 2010, at 11:00 PM, Paul Querna wrote: Isn't this problem an artifact of how all bucket brigades work, and is present in all output filter chains? An output filter might be called multiple times, but a single bucket can still contain a 4gb chunk easily. It

RE: mod_cache: store_body() bites off more than it can chew

2010-09-13 Thread Paul Fee
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: -Original Message- From: Graham Leggett Sent: Montag, 13. September 2010 16:35 To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: mod_cache: store_body() bites off more than it can chew On 13 Sep 2010, at 4:18 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: It is not

Re: mod_cache: store_body() bites off more than it can chew

2010-09-06 Thread Paul Fee
Graham Leggett wrote: Given that the make-cache-writes-atomic problem requires a change to the data format, it may be useful to look at this now, before v2.4 is baked, which will happen soon. How much of a performance boost is the use-null-terminated-strings? Regards, Graham -- If

Re: [PATCH] tproxy2 patch to the apache 2.2.15

2010-08-13 Thread Paul Fee
JeHo Park wrote: snip yes, i see, so i also made tproxy4 apache patch to the version httpd 2.2.9 and tested it in debian linux box successfully!. the software version i tested looks below -- kernel: vanilla 2.6.31 [tproxy4 included as default ] apache: 2.2.9 [tproxy4 patch applied]

Re: [PATCH] tproxy2 patch to the apache 2.2.15

2010-08-12 Thread Paul Fee
JeHo Park wrote: hello Daniel thanks your interest. - Original Message - From: Daniel Ruggeri drugg...@primary.net To: dev@httpd.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 9:11 AM Subject: Re: [PATCH] tproxy2 patch to the apache 2.2.15 On 8/3/2010 9:57 AM, JeHo Park wrote:

Re: Talking about proxy workers

2010-08-10 Thread Paul Fee
Paul Fee wrote: Rainer Jung wrote: Minor additions inside. On 06.08.2010 14:49, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: -Original Message- From: Paul Fee Sent: Freitag, 6. August 2010 14:44 To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: Talking about proxy workers Also, is it possible

Re: Talking about proxy workers

2010-08-09 Thread Paul Fee
Rainer Jung wrote: Minor additions inside. On 06.08.2010 14:49, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: -Original Message- From: Paul Fee Sent: Freitag, 6. August 2010 14:44 To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: Talking about proxy workers Also, is it possible to setup these three

Re: OS Keep-alive on forward proxy

2010-08-06 Thread Paul Fee
Rainer Jung wrote: snip The default worker for forward proxying does not use connection pooling in the naive sense. It closes each connection after each request. Regardless of pooling, since that's httpd's internal implmentation, is there a reason for defaulting to non-persistent TCP

Re: Talking about proxy workers

2010-08-06 Thread Paul Fee
Mark Watts wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/08/10 12:13, Jeff Trawick wrote: On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 3:54 AM, Rainer Jung rainer.j...@kippdata.de wrote: On 05.08.2010 21:30, Eric Covener wrote:

RE: Talking about proxy workers

2010-08-06 Thread Paul Fee
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: 3: Pool connection for reuse by any client. Yes, but this is needed separately for every origin server you forward to: Proxy http://www.frequentlyused.com/ # Set an arbitrary parameter to trigger the creation of a worker ProxySet keepalive=on /Proxy

Re: OS Keep-alive on forward proxy

2010-08-05 Thread Paul Fee
Rainer Jung wrote: snip And yes: the forward proxy does *not* do HTTP Keepalive. Technical reason: the connections to the origin server are pooled and retrieved from and returned to the pool for each request. A forward proxy usually talks to many diferent origin servers. Keeping those

RE: OS Keep-alive on forward proxy

2010-08-05 Thread Paul Fee
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: -Original Message- From: Paul Fee Sent: Donnerstag, 5. August 2010 11:18 To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: OS Keep-alive on forward proxy Rainer Jung wrote: snip And yes: the forward proxy does *not* do HTTP Keepalive. Technical

Re: mod_deflate handling of empty initial brigade

2010-06-03 Thread Paul Fee
Bryan McQuade wrote: Are there any cases where it's important for ap_pass_bridgade to pass on an empty brigade? Doesn't sound like it, but since this is a core library change I want to double check. When handling a CONNECT request, the response will have no body. In mod_proxy, the CONNECT

RE: Age calculation in mod_cache.

2010-04-15 Thread Paul Fee
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: -Original Message- From: Ryujiro Shibuya Sent: Mittwoch, 14. April 2010 03:35 To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Age calculation in mod_cache. Hello, A minor issue in the age calculation in mod_cache [ap_cache_current_age() in cache_util.c]

Eliminating absolute paths on installation

2006-12-13 Thread Paul Fee
Hello all, After building Apache httpd, I find that the httpd executable has explicit knowledge of its ultimate install location as specified with: ./configure --prefix=install location Items with this absolute knowledge include: ServerRoot (e.g. httpd implicitly know where to find its config

Re: Eliminating absolute paths on installation

2006-12-13 Thread Paul Fee
- Original Message - From: Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: Eliminating absolute paths on installation Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:16:08 -0500 On Wed, 2006-13-12 at 13:16 +0100, Paul Fee wrote: This is a problem for me as the install location

Re: Eliminating absolute paths on installation

2006-12-13 Thread Paul Fee
- Original Message - From: Joe Orton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: Eliminating absolute paths on installation Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 14:33:03 + On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 01:16:35PM +0100, Paul Fee wrote: The RPATH is slightly different. The only

Re: Re: De-Chunking

2006-11-15 Thread Paul Fee
- Original Message - From: Christian V. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: Re: De-Chunking Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 09:59:08 +0100 Christian V. wrote: Nick Kew wrote: On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:24:05 +0100 Christian V. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi , i 'm

Header compression (or lack of) in mod_proxy

2006-11-07 Thread Paul Fee
Hello all, I'm using Apache as a HTTP proxy. Regarding the request and response headers, I've done some tests and noticed different behaviour in the request and response direction. The request headers are compressed (i.e. headers with same name are merged into one header and comma separated).

Re: Header compression (or lack of) in mod_proxy

2006-11-07 Thread Paul Fee
Sorry for the double post, I thought my first post got dropped. But it was my fault because I hadn't subscribed. Anyway more below... - Original Message - From: Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: confirm subscribe to dev@httpd.apache.org Paul Fee

Re: De-Chunking

2006-11-07 Thread Paul Fee
- Original Message - From: Christian V. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dev@httpd.apache.org Subject: De-Chunking Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:24:05 +0100 Hi, I'm running a third-party web service authentication module that hangs when the request coming from the client is splitted out

Header compression (or lack of) in mod_proxy

2006-11-06 Thread Paul Fee
Hello all, I'm using Apache as a HTTP proxy. Regarding the request and response headers, I've done some tests and noticed different behaviour in the request and response direction. The request headers are compressed (i.e. headers with same name are merged into one header and comma