Re: [Bug 61551] Event MPM workers stuck in Gracefully Finishing with no connections left

2017-11-08 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 2:50 PM, wrote: > https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61551 > > --- Comment #18 from Eric Covener --- > > Maybe a bit premature to ask mod_Security to make a change API wise. > > Looks like a process_connection() hook could complete without changing > the state

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-31 Thread Stefan Eissing
Thanks for testing and verifying the fix, Stefan! > Am 31.07.2017 um 11:32 schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > : > > 4tr i was able to fix this by mod_h2 v1.10.10 > > Greets, > Stefan > > Am 25.07.2017 um 15:40 schrieb Stefan Eissing: >> Well, if the customer could reproduce this at a >>

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-31 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
4tr i was able to fix this by mod_h2 v1.10.10 Greets, Stefan Am 25.07.2017 um 15:40 schrieb Stefan Eissing: > Well, if the customer could reproduce this at a > > LogLevel http2:trace2 > > that would help. > >> Am 25.07.2017 um 15:38 schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG >> : >> >> Hello Ste

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-25 Thread Stefan Eissing
I am waiting to hear back from the peeps that opened the github issue. From how I read their logs, the patch should help them. Will report what they say. -Stefan > Am 25.07.2017 um 15:40 schrieb Stefan Eissing : > > Well, if the customer could reproduce this at a > > LogLevel http2:trace2 >

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-25 Thread Stefan Eissing
Well, if the customer could reproduce this at a LogLevel http2:trace2 that would help. > Am 25.07.2017 um 15:38 schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > : > > Hello Stefan, > > thanks for the patch. No it does not solve the problem our customer is > seeing. > > What kind of details / logs y

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-25 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello Stefan, thanks for the patch. No it does not solve the problem our customer is seeing. What kind of details / logs you need? Greets, Stefan Am 25.07.2017 um 11:59 schrieb Stefan Eissing: > The issue was opened here: https://github.com/icing/mod_h2/issues/143 > > I made a patch that i hop

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-25 Thread Stefan Eissing
The issue was opened here: https://github.com/icing/mod_h2/issues/143 I made a patch that i hope addresses the problem. The 2.4.x version I attach to this mail. Thanks! Stefan h2_stream_stall_2.4.x-v0.diff Description: Binary data > Am 25.07.2017 um 08:13 schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-24 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Am 24.07.2017 um 23:06 schrieb Stefan Eissing: > I have another report of request getting stuck, resulting in the error you > noticed. Will look tomorrow and report back here what I find. Thanks, if you need any logs. Pleae ask. Stefan > >> Am 24.07.2017 um 22:20 schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profi

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-24 Thread Stefan Eissing
I have another report of request getting stuck, resulting in the error you noticed. Will look tomorrow and report back here what I find. > Am 24.07.2017 um 22:20 schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > : > > Hello all, > > currently 8 hours of testing without any issues. > > @Stefan > i've mos

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-24 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello all, currently 8 hours of testing without any issues. @Stefan i've most probably another issue with http2 where some elements of the page are sometimes missing and the connection results in ERR_CONNECTION_CLOSED after 60s. What kind of details do you need? Greets, Stefan Am 22.07.2017 um 1

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-23 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
First test with version five looks good so far will continue extensive testing tomorrow. Greets, Stefan Excuse my typo sent from my mobile phone. > Am 22.07.2017 um 13:35 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > >> On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 2:18 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:31 PM, Stefan

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-22 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 2:18 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:31 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > wrote: >> >> your new defer linger V3 deadlocked as well. >> >> GDB traces: >> https://www.apaste.info/LMfJ > > This shows the listener thread waiting for a worker while there ar

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-22 Thread Stefan Eissing
And to answer myself: no, the v3 patch does not expose anything when running in h2fuzz. > Am 22.07.2017 um 07:17 schrieb Stefan Eissing : > > Profihost, where bugs come to die! > > I am currently fully overloaded, but it would be interesting to check how the > previous versions of the patch fa

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Stefan Eissing
Profihost, where bugs come to die! I am currently fully overloaded, but it would be interesting to check how the previous versions of the patch fare in a h2fuzz setup. -Stefan > Am 22.07.2017 um 02:18 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:31 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > w

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:31 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > > your new defer linger V3 deadlocked as well. > > GDB traces: > https://www.apaste.info/LMfJ This shows the listener thread waiting for a worker while there are many available. My mistake, the worker threads failed to rearm

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello Yann, your new defer linger V3 deadlocked as well. GDB traces: https://www.apaste.info/LMfJ But this time i have no fullstatus for you as the apache didn't serve any connections at all anymore. But even before i did NOT see those strange values for closing connections. Thanks! Greets, St

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello Yann, i downloaded V3. Can't guarantee when i can test. May be today or on monday. Greets, Stefan Am 21.07.2017 um 01:08 schrieb Yann Ylavic: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > wrote: >> V3 didn't help. > > I just posted a new patch in this thread, with a

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Eric Covener
> So, should we favor the draining of defer_linger_chain as much workers > as necessary like the current patch, or should we have as few workers > as possible and not start new workers in loops with no effect on > defer_linger_chain? I think the fewer workers option could lead to hard to debug (fr

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Eric Covener
> Also, it seems that in the deferred lingering case we should probaly > shorten the socket timeout before calling (and possibly blocking on) > ap_start_lingering_close()'s hooks/flush, since we likely come from a > time-up already... +1

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Luca Toscano wrote: >> >> To prevent starvation of deferred lingering closes, the listener may >> create a worker at the of its loop, when/if the chain is (fully) >> filled. > > IIUC the trick is to run "(have_idle_worker && push2worker(NULL) == > APR_SUCCESS)" tha

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Luca Toscano
Hi Yann, 2017-07-21 1:05 GMT+02:00 Yann Ylavic : > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > > > So overall, this patch may introduce the need for more workers than > > before, what was (wrongly) done by the listener thread has to be done > > somewhere anyway... > > That patch didn

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-21 Thread Luca Toscano
2017-07-21 1:16 GMT+02:00 Yann Ylavic : > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Postmaster > wrote: > > This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. Your > email message was not delivered as is to the intended recipients because > malware was detected in one or more attachments in

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > wrote: >> V3 didn't help. > > I just posted a new patch in this thread, with a new approach which I > think is better anyway. > > Would you mind testing it in your environment?

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Postmaster wrote: > This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. Your email > message was not delivered as is to the intended recipients because malware > was detected in one or more attachments included with it. All attachments > were delet

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > V3 didn't help. I just posted a new patch in this thread, with a new approach which I think is better anyway. Would you mind testing it in your environment? Regards, Yann.

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > So overall, this patch may introduce the need for more workers than > before, what was (wrongly) done by the listener thread has to be done > somewhere anyway... That patch didn't work (as reported by Stefan Pribe) and I now don't feel the n

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 9:52 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > So overall, this patch may introduce the need for more workers than > before, what was (wrongly) done by the listener thread has to be done > somewhere anyway... That patch didn't work (as reported by Stefan Pribe) and I now don't feel the n

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Yes: Slot PID Stopping ConnectionsThreads Async connections total accepting busy idle writing keep-alive closing 03614 no 1 no4196 0 0 4294966701 13615 no 0 no5195 0 0 4294966697 21022

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > Yes it looks the same but I can't tell if it is. > > Here's a backtrace from V3: > https://apaste.info/Aw0r Thanks Stefan, how about mod_status, still some strange entries? Regards, Yann.

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Yes it looks the same but I can't tell if it is. Here's a backtrace from V3: https://apaste.info/Aw0r Greets, Stefan Excuse my typo sent from my mobile phone. > Am 20.07.2017 um 13:01 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > wrote: >> V3 didn'

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > V3 didn't help. Will post a new gdb backtrace soon takes some time as I'm on > holiday. Thanks Stefan, still some/the same issue in status? Regards, Yann.

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-20 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
V3 didn't help. Will post a new gdb backtrace soon takes some time as I'm on holiday. Stefan Excuse my typo sent from my mobile phone. > Am 20.07.2017 um 01:26 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > wrote: >> Am 19.07.2017 um 22:46 schrieb Y

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Am 20.07.2017 um 01:26 schrieb Yann Ylavic: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > wrote: >> Am 19.07.2017 um 22:46 schrieb Yann Ylavic: >>> >>> Attached is a v2 if you feel confident enough, still ;) >> >> Thanks, yes i will. > > If you managed to install v2 already

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > Am 19.07.2017 um 22:46 schrieb Yann Ylavic: >> >> Attached is a v2 if you feel confident enough, still ;) > > Thanks, yes i will. If you managed to install v2 already you may want to ignore this new v3, which only addresses a

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Am 19.07.2017 um 22:46 schrieb Yann Ylavic: > Hi Stefan, > > thanks for testing again! > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG > wrote: >> >> What looks strange >> from a first view is that async connections closing has very high and >> strange values: >> 4294967211 >

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Yann Ylavic
Hi Stefan, thanks for testing again! On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > > What looks strange > from a first view is that async connections closing has very high and > strange values: > 4294967211 Indeed, I messed up with mpm_event's lingering_count in the fir

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Eric Covener
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > Hello, > > here we go: > > This one is from a server where the first httpd process got stuck: > >Slot PID Stopping ConnectionsThreads Async connections >total accepting busy idle writin

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello, here we go: This one is from a server where the first httpd process got stuck: Slot PID Stopping ConnectionsThreads Async connections total accepting busy idle writing keep-alive closing 031675 no 0 no0200 0 0 42

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello Luca, i need to wait until a machine is crashing again. What looks strange from a first view is that async connections closing has very high and strange values: 4294967211 Even a not yet crashed system has those: Slot PID Stopping ConnectionsThreads Async connections

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Luca Toscano
Hello Stefan, 2017-07-19 17:05 GMT+02:00 Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG < s.pri...@profihost.ag>: > > Am 19.07.2017 um 16:59 schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG: > > Hello Yann, > > > > i'm observing some deadlocks again. > > > > I'm using > > httpd 2.4.27 > > + mod_h2 > > + httpd-2.4.x-mpm_event-

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello, fullstatus says: Slot PID Stopping ConnectionsThreads Async connections total accepting busy idle writing keep-alive closing 025042 no 0 no2198 0 0 4294966698 14347 no 0 no0200 0

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Am 19.07.2017 um 16:59 schrieb Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG: > Hello Yann, > > i'm observing some deadlocks again. > > I'm using > httpd 2.4.27 > + mod_h2 > + httpd-2.4.x-mpm_event-wakeup-v7.1.patch > + your ssl linger fix patch from this thread > > What kind of information do you need? If you

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-19 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello Yann, i'm observing some deadlocks again. I'm using httpd 2.4.27 + mod_h2 + httpd-2.4.x-mpm_event-wakeup-v7.1.patch + your ssl linger fix patch from this thread What kind of information do you need? If you need a full stack backtrace - from which pid? Or from all httpd pids? Thanks! Gre

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-18 Thread Luca Toscano
2017-07-17 9:33 GMT+02:00 Stefan Eissing : > > > Am 14.07.2017 um 21:52 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Yann Ylavic > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem > wrote: > >>> > >>> On 06/30/2017 12:18 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > IMHO mod_

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-17 Thread Stefan Eissing
Threw it into my test suite and works nicely. > Am 17.07.2017 um 14:02 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: >> >> I will test the patch, most likely today. I lot of +1s for the initiative! > > Thanks Stefan, as I said the proposed patch currently

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-17 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > I will test the patch, most likely today. I lot of +1s for the initiative! Thanks Stefan, as I said the proposed patch currently reuses the existing CONN_STATE_LINGER state to shutdown connections, but if it needs to be set from outside m

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-17 Thread Stefan Eissing
> Am 14.07.2017 um 21:52 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >>> >>> On 06/30/2017 12:18 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: IMHO mod_ssl shoudn't (BIO_)flush unconditionally in modssl_smart_

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-14 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >> >> On 06/30/2017 12:18 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >>> >>> IMHO mod_ssl shoudn't (BIO_)flush unconditionally in >>> modssl_smart_shutdown(), only in the "abortive" mode of >>> ssl_filter_io_

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-07-05 Thread Luca Toscano
Hi Yann and Ruediger, 2c from a mpm-event newbie inline: 2017-06-30 13:33 GMT+02:00 Yann Ylavic : > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > > > On 06/30/2017 12:18 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > >> > >> IMHO mod_ssl shoudn't (BIO_)flush unconditionally in > >> modssl_smart_shutdown

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-06-30 Thread Stefan Eissing
> Am 30.06.2017 um 13:33 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >> >> On 06/30/2017 12:18 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >>> >>> IMHO mod_ssl shoudn't (BIO_)flush unconditionally in >>> modssl_smart_shutdown(), only in the "abortive" mode of >>> ssl_filter_io_

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-06-30 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > On 06/30/2017 12:18 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >> >> IMHO mod_ssl shoudn't (BIO_)flush unconditionally in >> modssl_smart_shutdown(), only in the "abortive" mode of >> ssl_filter_io_shutdown(). > > I think the issue starts before that. > ap_pr

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-06-30 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Luca Toscano wrote: > > 2017-06-30 12:18 GMT+02:00 Yann Ylavic : >> > >> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1706669 >> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1734656 >> > >> > IIUC these ones are meant to provide a more async beha

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-06-30 Thread Ruediger Pluem
On 06/30/2017 12:18 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > Hi Luca, > > [better/easier to talk about details on dev@] > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:05 AM, wrote: >> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60956 >> >> --- Comment #11 from Luca Toscano --- >> Other two interesting trunk improvements

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-06-30 Thread Luca Toscano
Hi Yann! 2017-06-30 12:18 GMT+02:00 Yann Ylavic : > Hi Luca, > > [better/easier to talk about details on dev@] > > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:05 AM, wrote: > > https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60956 > > > > --- Comment #11 from Luca Toscano --- > > Other two interesting trunk imp

Re: [Bug 60956] Event MPM listener thread may get blocked by SSL shutdowns

2017-06-30 Thread Yann Ylavic
Hi Luca, [better/easier to talk about details on dev@] On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:05 AM, wrote: > https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60956 > > --- Comment #11 from Luca Toscano --- > Other two interesting trunk improvements that have not been backported yet: > > http://svn.apache.o

Re: event mpm and slave connections

2016-02-01 Thread Stefan Eissing
Sure, Bill. Love to have your feedback on this and make it work for mod_ftp, too. > Am 30.01.2016 um 06:04 schrieb William A Rowe Jr : > > If you can give me a few days (not httpd'ing again until > late Sun eve) - this is very close to the issues we have > in mod_ftp with the data connection/re

Re: event mpm and slave connections

2016-01-29 Thread William A Rowe Jr
If you can give me a few days (not httpd'ing again until late Sun eve) - this is very close to the issues we have in mod_ftp with the data connection/request aside the control connection. The right patch will improve both sets of dirty hacks :) Thanks for the proposal! Bill On Fri, Jan 29, 2016

Re: event mpm and slave connections

2016-01-29 Thread Eric Covener
Ditto, didn't see anything controversial. On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Looks good to me... If it results in problems or issues, > we'll fix 'em as the come along ;) > >> On Jan 29, 2016, at 8:01 AM, Stefan Eissing >> wrote: >> >> I would like to propose some additions

Re: event mpm and slave connections

2016-01-29 Thread Jim Jagielski
Looks good to me... If it results in problems or issues, we'll fix 'em as the come along ;) > On Jan 29, 2016, at 8:01 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: > > I would like to propose some additions to event that help me get rid of two > ugly hacks in mod_http2: > > 1. Initialization of slave connecti

event mpm and slave connections

2016-01-29 Thread Stefan Eissing
I would like to propose some additions to event that help me get rid of two ugly hacks in mod_http2: 1. Initialization of slave connections event registers on pre_connection hook and checks if c is a slave (c->master) and if the connection state is either not there or the same as master (poi

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-10-18 Thread Jim Jagielski
Still missing 1 more vote... this has been running on our infra with NO problems. On Sep 26, 2013, at 8:25 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:07 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > >> Before we incorporate it... can we have some sense of the impact of the >> optimization? So fa

Re: Add skiplist to APR 1.5 (Was: Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct))

2013-10-02 Thread Jim Jagielski
Now that skiplist is being added to APR 1.5, I will start the process of moving trunk to use it and will propose a backport for 2.4...

Re: Add skiplist to APR 1.5 (Was: Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct))

2013-09-30 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1... On Sep 28, 2013, at 12:12 PM, Graham Leggett wrote: > >> On 26 Sep 2013, at 15:44, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> Like I said, I think that skiplist fits better in APR; in >> fact there are a few other things in httpd that would be >> "better" in APR, but APR and httpd are 2 sep projects an

Re: Add skiplist to APR 1.5 (Was: Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct))

2013-09-28 Thread Graham Leggett
> On 26 Sep 2013, at 15:44, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Like I said, I think that skiplist fits better in APR; in > fact there are a few other things in httpd that would be > "better" in APR, but APR and httpd are 2 sep projects and so > we can't "force" things. > > In fact, I'm adding dev@apr to

Add skiplist to APR 1.5 (Was: Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct))

2013-09-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Sep 26, 2013, at 10:20 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:25:46 -0400 > Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> >> On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:07 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. >> wrote: >> >>> Before we incorporate it... can we have some sense of the impact of >>> the optimization? So far we

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-26 Thread William A. Rowe Jr.
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:25:46 -0400 Jim Jagielski wrote: > > On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:07 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. > wrote: > > > Before we incorporate it... can we have some sense of the impact of > > the optimization? So far we don't have much data to go on. > > From the orig post: "My benchmark

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-26 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:07 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > Before we incorporate it... can we have some sense of the impact of the > optimization? So far we don't have much data to go on. From the orig post: "My benchmarks show decreased latency and a performance boost of ~5% (on avg)" > >

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-25 Thread William A. Rowe Jr.
Before we incorporate it... can we have some sense of the impact of the optimization? So far we don't have much data to go on. There is talk of releasing some apr 1.5 enhancements. I'd personally favor adding skip list to apr rather than -util or httpd, since it could be useful core functionalit

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-25 Thread Jim Jagielski
Bueller? Bueller? On Sep 19, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > With the successful running, does anyone wish to add > some votes to STATUS to allow the backport to be > approved? :) > > On Sep 16, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> visible if pushed, yes. >> >> On Sep 15, 20

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-19 Thread Jim Jagielski
With the successful running, does anyone wish to add some votes to STATUS to allow the backport to be approved? :) On Sep 16, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > visible if pushed, yes. > > On Sep 15, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET > wrote: > >> >> Le 15/09/2013 16:30, R

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
visible if pushed, yes. On Sep 15, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET wrote: > > Le 15/09/2013 16:30, Rainer Jung a écrit : >> I'm pretty sure from those pictures you would not be able to find the point >> in time where I switched 2.4.6 and 2.4.7-dev between the servers. > > In ot

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-15 Thread Rainer Jung
s are far from being saturated. The load mix isn't similar enough and constant enough to derive anything from the response times we could extract from the access logs. I doubt that we can measure the benefits in this scenario, but we can check, whether in a pretty complex situation the skiplist

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-15 Thread Marion & Christophe JAILLET
Le 15/09/2013 16:30, Rainer Jung a écrit : I'm pretty sure from those pictures you would not be able to find the point in time where I switched 2.4.6 and 2.4.7-dev between the servers. In other words, does it mean that no special performance improvement is to be expected ? I remember to hav

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-15 Thread Rainer Jung
On 15.09.2013 05:31, Rainer Jung wrote: > On 10.09.2013 16:13, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> For completeness, a full, combined patch is: >> >> http://people.apache.org/~jim/patches/httpd-2.4-event-test.patch >> >> It requires a patch that knows about creating new files >> when encountering /dev/null

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-14 Thread Rainer Jung
On 10.09.2013 16:13, Jim Jagielski wrote: > For completeness, a full, combined patch is: > > http://people.apache.org/~jim/patches/httpd-2.4-event-test.patch > > It requires a patch that knows about creating new files > when encountering /dev/null... The code (plus r1410004) runs on eos (US

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
For completeness, a full, combined patch is: http://people.apache.org/~jim/patches/httpd-2.4-event-test.patch It requires a patch that knows about creating new files when encountering /dev/null... On Sep 10, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > For the testing, we need: > >http://

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-10 Thread Jim Jagielski
For the testing, we need: http://people.apache.org/~jim/patches/httpd-2.4-skiplist.patch http://people.apache.org/~jim/patches/httpd-2.4-podx.patch http://people.apache.org/~jim/patches/httpd-2.4-event.patch This includes all the performance/sync updates Can we get infra to test that

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-08 Thread Stefan Fritsch
Am Donnerstag, 5. September 2013, 23:46:21 schrieb Rainer Jung: > In addition: what about eventopt? AFAICT, the problem that the listener thread busy-loops if there are not enough worker threads is still unfixed [1]. Or did I miss the fix? [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-06 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Sep 5, 2013, at 5:46 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: > On 05.09.2013 16:35, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> BTW, the main diff between event in trunk and 2.4 is >> the use of skiplist. My benchmarks show decreased latency >> and a performance boost of ~5% (on avg). Can anyone confirm? >> It would be nice to p

Re: event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-05 Thread Rainer Jung
On 05.09.2013 16:35, Jim Jagielski wrote: > BTW, the main diff between event in trunk and 2.4 is > the use of skiplist. My benchmarks show decreased latency > and a performance boost of ~5% (on avg). Can anyone confirm? > It would be nice to possibly get that in 2.4.7 as well. I can offer to negot

event MPM (Was: Re: Planning for 2.4.7 in Oct)

2013-09-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
BTW, the main diff between event in trunk and 2.4 is the use of skiplist. My benchmarks show decreased latency and a performance boost of ~5% (on avg). Can anyone confirm? It would be nice to possibly get that in 2.4.7 as well. On Sep 5, 2013, at 9:08 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > It would be nice

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-15 Thread Niklas Edmundsson
On Sat, 12 Jan 2013, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Thursday 10 January 2013, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: To reiterate back to the event mpm / mod_status integration, are there any work in progress on implementing a more verbose status display for the event mpm? I'm thinking of something that can

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-12 Thread Stefan Fritsch
On Thursday 10 January 2013, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: > To reiterate back to the event mpm / mod_status integration, are > there any work in progress on implementing a more verbose status > display for the event mpm? I'm thinking of something that can show > all requests currentl

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-10 Thread Niklas Edmundsson
To reiterate back to the event mpm / mod_status integration, are there any work in progress on implementing a more verbose status display for the event mpm? I'm thinking of something that can show all requests currently being processed like we have today for prefork/worker. The cu

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-07 Thread Stefan Fritsch
On Monday 07 January 2013, Daniel Lescohier wrote: > I see that event mpm uses a worker queue that uses a condition > variable, and it does a condition variable signal when something > is pushed onto it. If all of the cpu cores are doing useful work, > the signal is not going to for

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-07 Thread Daniel Lescohier
I see that event mpm uses a worker queue that uses a condition variable, and it does a condition variable signal when something is pushed onto it. If all of the cpu cores are doing useful work, the signal is not going to force a context switch out of a thread doing useful work, the thread will

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-05 Thread Jim Jagielski
+1... a lot of little improvements can result in a BIG improvement. On Jan 5, 2013, at 8:34 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: > On 05 Jan 2013, at 2:05 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > >> For 1., a better thread selection would definitely be a win. For 2. >> and 3., it is less obvious. > > +1. > > Just

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-05 Thread Graham Leggett
On 05 Jan 2013, at 2:05 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > For 1., a better thread selection would definitely be a win. For 2. > and 3., it is less obvious. +1. Just because in some cases a cache might not help, doesn't mean we shouldn't take advantage of the cache when it will help. Regards, Graha

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-04 Thread Stefan Fritsch
On Friday 04 January 2013, Daniel Lescohier wrote: > I just saw this from last month from Stefan Fritsch and Niklas > Edmundsson: > > The fact that the client ip shows up on all threads points to some > > >> potential optimization: Recently active threads should be > >> preferred, because their m

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2013-01-04 Thread Daniel Lescohier
I just saw this from last month from Stefan Fritsch and Niklas Edmundsson: The fact that the client ip shows up on all threads points to some >> potential optimization: Recently active threads should be preferred, >> because their memory is more likely to be in the cpu caches. Right >> now, the th

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2012-12-17 Thread Niklas Edmundsson
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Sunday 16 December 2012, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: I'm playing around with the event mpm in httpd 2.4.3, and I've come to the conclusion that the stats reported by mod_status is rather strange. I'm not sure if it's a bug or si

Re: event mpm and mod_status

2012-12-16 Thread Stefan Fritsch
On Sunday 16 December 2012, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: > I'm playing around with the event mpm in httpd 2.4.3, and I've come > to the conclusion that the stats reported by mod_status is rather > strange. I'm not sure if it's a bug or simply not implemented... > >

event mpm and mod_status

2012-12-16 Thread Niklas Edmundsson
Hi all. I'm playing around with the event mpm in httpd 2.4.3, and I've come to the conclusion that the stats reported by mod_status is rather strange. I'm not sure if it's a bug or simply not implemented... My test case is just a simple file transfer of a DVD imag

Re: timeout queues in event mpm

2011-11-14 Thread Greg Ames
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Paul Querna wrote: > > The problem became that in trunk, we had to told the lock for the > timeout queues while we were doing the pollset operation. The > pollset already had its own internal mutex too, for its own rings. So > we were double locking a piece of

Re: timeout queues in event mpm

2011-11-14 Thread Paul Querna
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Greg Ames wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Paul Querna wrote: >> >> 4) Have the single Event thread de-queue operations from all the worker >> threads. > > > Since the operations include Add and Remove, are you saying we would have to > have to wait

Re: timeout queues in event mpm

2011-11-14 Thread Greg Ames
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Paul Querna wrote: > > 4) Have the single Event thread de-queue operations from all the worker > threads. > Since the operations include Add and Remove, are you saying we would have to have to wait for a context switch to the listener thread before apr_pollset_a

Re: timeout queues in event mpm

2011-11-13 Thread Jim Jagielski
na/httpd/compare/trunk...event-performance> > > I did some basic benchmarking to validate it, though if anyone has a > real test lab setup that can throw huge traffic numbers at it that > would be very helpful. > > For the "It works" default index page, I got the followi

Re: timeout queues in event mpm

2011-11-13 Thread Paul Querna
that would be very helpful. For the "It works" default index page, I got the following: event mpm trunk: 15210.07 req/second event mpm performance branch: 15775.42 req/second (~4%) nginx 0.7.65-1ubuntu2: 12070.35 Event MPM was using a 100% default install configuration, nginx was usi

Re: timeout queues in event mpm

2011-11-12 Thread Stefan Fritsch
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011, Stefan Fritsch wrote: locking for the timeout queues. But what we really should do in 2.4.0 is remove all the MPM-implementation specific details from conn_state_t. The only field that is actually used outside of the MPMs is 'state'. If we make the rest non-public and someh

Re: timeout queues in event mpm

2011-11-12 Thread Stefan Fritsch
in thread would need to do a sorted insert into its main timeout queue, which is expensive. Or how would you find out when the next timeout is due? Without modification to the event mpm, it would potentially cause some issues as the event thread isn't always waking up that often, but I

  1   2   3   >