patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Thanks very much for your help!
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 6:38 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Committed r1600656
Thanks very much for your help!
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 6:38 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Committed r1600656
Thx
On Jun 4, 2014, at
SF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
> support
>
> Thank you very much for your help!
>
> Thanks,
> Yingqi
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 8:31 AM
> To: dev@httpd.a
-
From: Lu, Yingqi [mailto:yingqi...@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 8:50 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Thank you very much for your help!
Thanks,
Yingqi
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski
Thank you very much for your help!
Thanks,
Yingqi
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 8:31 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Next on the agenda is to
6279.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Yingqi
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-
>>> From: Lu, Yingqi [mailto:yingqi...@intel.com]
>>> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2014 11:48 PM
>>> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: [PATCH A
sing.
>>
>> I already updated the Bugzilla database for the item 55897 and item 56279.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Yingqi
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Lu, Yingqi [mailto:yingqi...@intel.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2014 11:48 PM
>
you think is better. I can quickly send you an
> update for review.
>
> Thanks,
> Yingqi
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Lu, Yingqi
> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2014 3:28 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
>
Hi,
see http://httpd.apache.org/lists.html#http-dev
You should just send a mail to dev-unsubscr...@httpd.apache.org.
best regards,
CJ
> Message du 02/06/14 16:16
> De : "Mihai Iacob"
> A : dev@httpd.apache.org
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: [PATCH ASF bu
55897 and item
56279.
>
> Thanks,
> Yingqi
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Lu, Yingqi [mailto:yingqi...@intel.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2014 11:48 PM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with
SO_REUSEPORT support
&
item 56279.
>
> Thanks,
> Yingqi
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Lu, Yingqi [mailto:yingqi...@intel.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2014 11:48 PM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
> support
>
> Hi Jim
() itself.
>>
>>> On May 30, 2014, at 11:15 AM, Lu, Yingqi wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you very much!
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Yingqi
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
>>&
gt;
>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks very much for clarifying this with me. I added #ifdef in the code
>>>> to check _SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN in the so_reuseport patch. Bucket patch does
>>>> not use this parameter so that it remains the sa
; -Original Message-----
>> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
>> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 7:07 AM
>> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
>> support
>>
>> Thx! Let me review. My pl
ay, May 30, 2014 7:07 AM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
> support
>
> Thx! Let me review. My plan is to fold into trunk this weekend.
>
> On May 16, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Lu, Yingqi wrote:
>
>> Hi Jim,
>
Thank you very much!
Thanks,
Yingqi
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 7:07 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Thx! Let me review. My plan is to fold
m]
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 7:53 AM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with
SO_REUSEPORT support
>
> I was thinking more about the sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN) stuff...
> We could either check for that during config/build
ent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 7:53 AM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
> support
>
> I was thinking more about the sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN) stuff...
> We could either check for that during config/build or protect it wit
Hi All,
I just want to ping again on these two patches.
Thanks,
Yingqi
-Original Message-
From: Lu, Yingqi [mailto:yingqi...@intel.com]
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 9:03 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
trunk?
Thanks,
Yingqi
-Original Message-
From: Lu, Yingqi [mailto:yingqi...@intel.com]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 11:53 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Hi Jim,
Thanks very much for clarifying this with me. I
]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 11:53 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Hi Jim,
Thanks very much for clarifying this with me. I added #ifdef in the code to
check _SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN in the so_reuseport patch. Bucket patch
Dear all,
Any other feedback/comments/questions?
Thanks,
Yingqi
-Original Message-
From: Lu, Yingqi
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:00 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Hi Jim,
Thanks very much for your
Dear all,
Any other feedback/comments/questions?
Thanks,
Yingqi
-Original Message-
From: Lu, Yingqi
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:00 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Hi Jim,
Thanks very much for your
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 9:00 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Hi Jim,
Thanks very much for your email.
In the SO_REUSEPORT patch, SO_REUSEPORT support is checked inside listen.c
file. If the feature is not
: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 6:57 AM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
> support
>
> This is very cool!
>
> mod_status assumes that sysconf() exists, but do we need to do a config check
> on the para
org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
This is very cool!
mod_status assumes that sysconf() exists, but do we need to do a config check
on the params we use in these patches?
We look OK on Linux, FreeBSD and OSX...
I'm +1 on folding into tr
TCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
This is very cool!
mod_status assumes that sysconf() exists, but do we need to do a config check
on the params we use in these patches?
We look OK on Linux, FreeBSD and OSX...
I'm +1 on folding into trunk.
On May 13, 2014,
This is very cool!
mod_status assumes that sysconf() exists, but do we need
to do a config check on the params we use in these patches?
We look OK on Linux, FreeBSD and OSX...
I'm +1 on folding into trunk.
On May 13, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Lu, Yingqi wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> During the last couple
Thanks, Graham! I am looking forward to hearing your feedback.
Thanks,
Yingqi
From: Graham Leggett [mailto:minf...@sharp.fm]
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2014 12:08 PM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
On 07 Apr 2014, at 6
On 07 Apr 2014, at 6:21 PM, "Lu, Yingqi" wrote:
> I just want to ping again on the modifications we made on both of the patches
> [bugzilla #55897 and bugzilla #56279]. Please let us know your comments and
> feedback.
>
> I am reattaching the patch files here in case you missed original email
Bannister [mailto:is...@jellybaby.net]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2014 2:31 PM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897] prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
I'm afraid I don't understand this particular part from
httpd_trunk_so_reuseport.patch:
#ifndef SO_REUSEPO
I'm afraid I don't understand this particular part from
httpd_trunk_so_reuseport.patch:
#ifndef SO_REUSEPORT
#define SO_REUSEPORT 15
#endif
Why 15? Is this going to be portable across different platforms?
--
Tim Bannister – is...@jellybaby.net
defined in the httpd.conf file.
Thanks,
Yingqi
From: Yann Ylavic [mailto:ylavic@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 5:49 AM
To: httpd
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Lu, Yingqi
mailto:yingqi
t;
> >> ++1.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mar 6, 2014, at 3:15 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> -Original Message-
> >> >> From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mai
>>
>> On Mar 6, 2014, at 3:15 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> -Original Message-
>> >> From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wmr...@gmail.com]
>> >> Sent: Donnerstag, 6. März 2014 06:58
>> >>
lliam A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wmr...@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Donnerstag, 6. März 2014 06:58
> >> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with
> >> SO_REUSEPORT support
> >>
> >>
> >> If you
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Lu, Yingqi wrote:
> 1. If I understand correctly (please correct me if not), do you suggest
> duplicating the listen socks inside the child process with SO_REUSEPROT
> enabled? Yes, I agree this would be a cleaner implementation and I actually
> tried that before.
++1.
On Mar 6, 2014, at 3:15 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wmr...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Donnerstag, 6. März 2014 06:58
>> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH A
pen source and Apache community. We are
> still on the learning curve about a lot of things. Your feedback and
> comments really help us!
>
>
>
> Please let me know if you have any further questions.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Yingqi
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*
On 06 Mar 2014, at 10:15 AM, "Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group"
wrote:
> +1 to a new MPM on trunk. This gives it more time to settle and to stabilize
> without disrupting current stuff. And if it is fast and stable it will
> certainly
> cause the 'older' MPM to drop in userbase :-).
> IMHO this wo
> -Original Message-
> From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wmr...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Donnerstag, 6. März 2014 06:58
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with
> SO_REUSEPORT support
>
>
> If you want to truly r
, 2014 9:58 PM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Yingqi,
as one of the 'Windows folks' here, your idea is very intriguing, and I'm sorry
that other issues have distracted me from giving it the attention it de
On Thursday 06 of March 2014, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> If you want to truly re-architect the MPM, by all means, propose it as
> another MPM module. If it isn't adopted here, please don't hesitate
> to offer it to interested users as separate source (although I hope we
> find a way to adopt it
Yingqi,
as one of the 'Windows folks' here, your idea is very intriguing, and
I'm sorry that other issues have distracted me from giving it the
attention it deserves.
If you want to truly re-architect the MPM, by all means, propose it as
another MPM module. If it isn't adopted here, please don't
ann Ylavic [mailto:ylavic@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 5:04 AM
To: httpd
Subject: Re: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Hi Yingqi,
I'm a bit confused about the patch, mainly because it seems to handle the same
way both with and without
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> Also, but this is not related to this patch particularly (addressed to
> who knows), it's unclear to me why an accept mutex is needed at all.
> Multiple processes poll()ing the same inherited socket is safe but not
> multiple ones? Is that an O
Hi Yingqi,
I'm a bit confused about the patch, mainly because it seems to handle the
same way both with and without SO_REUSEPORT available, while SO_REUSEPORT
could (IMHO) be handled in children only (a less intrusive way).
With SO_REUSEPORT, I would have expected the accept mutex to be useless
s
I am reattaching the patch in case you missed the original email.
Thanks,
Yingqi
From: Lu, Yingqi
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 11:09 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT
support
Hi All,
I just want to ping again on this
Hi All,
I just want to ping again on this patch to see if there are any feedback and
comments. This is our first patch to the Apache community. Please let us know
if there is anything we can do to help you test and comment the patch.
Thanks,
Yingqi
From: Lu, Yingqi
Sent: Friday, January 24, 20
Hi All,
I just want to check if there are feedback/comments to this patch?
Thanks,
Yingqi
From: Lu, Yingqi
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2014 3:26 PM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: [PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT support
Dear All,
Our analysis of Apache httpd 2.4.
50 matches
Mail list logo
