Ryan Bloom wrote:
>On Monday 12 November 2001 09:48 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>
[...]
>>modules/proxy/proxy_connect.c does raw socket writes (see line
>>308). I think the idea here is that mod_proxy wants to bypass
>>everyone. Not the greatest of ideas (quite bogus actually) -
>>perhaps we
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 11:49:08PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>...
> --- httpd.h 2001/10/23 17:26:57 1.168
> +++ httpd.h 2001/11/12 23:49:06 1.169
>...
> +typedef struct core_output_filter_ctx {
> +apr_bucket_brigade *b;
> +apr_pool_t *subpool; /* subpool of c->pool
On Monday 12 November 2001 09:48 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 11:49:08PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > rbb 01/11/12 15:49:08
> > Log:
> > Begin to abstract out the underlying transport layer.
> > The first step is to remove the socket from the conn_rec
On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 11:49:08PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> rbb 01/11/12 15:49:08
> Log:
> Begin to abstract out the underlying transport layer.
> The first step is to remove the socket from the conn_rec,
> the server now lives in a context that is passed to the
> core's
On Saturday 10 November 2001 12:58 pm, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Sorry, my last message wasn't a very useful...
>
> ap_lingering_close() should be conditionally called based on a feature
> macro. Something like: HAVE_REUSE_ACCEPT_SOCKET. If the OS supports
> reusing the accept socket, conditionally
On Saturday 10 November 2001 12:37 pm, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Ryan,
> I understand the motivation for this, but it breaks Windows. In some cases
> we do not want to close the socket on Windows; it can be reused for a big
> performance boost.
I'm fixing it. This is going to require me to re-expor
-
From: "Bill Stoddard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker worker.c
> Ryan,
> I understand the motivation for this, but it breaks Windows. In some cases we do not
wan
r 10, 2001 1:26 PM
Subject: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker worker.c
> rbb 01/11/10 10:26:30
>
> Modified:include http_connection.h
>server connection.c
>server/mpm/beos beos.c
>server/mpm/mpmt_os2 mpmt_os2_c
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 01:04:48AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 01:00:09AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> > >...
> > > Whoever does the software behind apache-mbox (I take it this is
> > > mod_mbox?) might want to take note that it's spitting out invalid URLs..
> >
> > T
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 01:00:09AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> >...
> > Whoever does the software behind apache-mbox (I take it this is
> > mod_mbox?) might want to take note that it's spitting out invalid URLs..
>
> The URLs produced by mod_mbox are fine. Aaron must have posted an unescaped
> ve
On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 12:53:39AM -0700, Alex Stewart wrote:
> On a largely unrelated note, but something I found a little ironic given
> the nature of this list:
>
> Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> >
>http://www.apachelabs.org/apache-mbox/199902.mbox/<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Please note that the ab
On a largely unrelated note, but something I found a little ironic given
the nature of this list:
Aaron Bannert wrote:
> http://www.apachelabs.org/apache-mbox/199902.mbox/<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Please note that the above is not a valid URL. Specifically, the "<"
and ">" characters are technica
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 02:10:06PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> Take a look at:
>
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/apache-apr/pthreads/src/main/fdqueue.c
>
> specifically at revision 1.12, where I committed code to have
>
> slots in queue == Threads per child.
>
> This would be the time frame
On Wednesday 19 September 2001 02:32 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 02:03:13PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:49 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > > I'm not sure if simply closing the socket is the right answer either.
> > > Is there a more appropriat
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 02:03:13PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:49 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > I'm not sure if simply closing the socket is the right answer either.
> > Is there a more appropriate error code? "Server Temporarily Unavailable"
> > or whatnot?
> >
> >
On Wednesday 19 September 2001 02:05 pm, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:59 pm, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > Ryan Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:21 pm, Greg Ames wrote:
> > > > For now, ThreadsPerChild might be fine. I'd feel a little be
On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:59 pm, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Ryan Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:21 pm, Greg Ames wrote:
> > > For now, ThreadsPerChild might be fine. I'd feel a little better about
> > > some small constant, like 5 or 10. But the code d
On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:49 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 12:18:31PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 September 2001 12:11 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > > So I have two questions:
> > >
> > > 1) How do we send back that error?
> >
> > You can't. There is n
Aaron Bannert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 12:18:31PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 September 2001 12:11 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > > So I have two questions:
> > >
> > > 1) How do we send back that error?
> >
> > You can't. There is no way to determine
Ryan Bloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:21 pm, Greg Ames wrote:
> > For now, ThreadsPerChild might be fine. I'd feel a little better about
> > some small constant, like 5 or 10. But the code does need to learn to
> > deal with "queue full" more gracefully.
>
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 12:18:31PM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 September 2001 12:11 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > So I have two questions:
> >
> > 1) How do we send back that error?
>
> You can't. There is no way to determine how busy the other processes are.
I'm not sure if simpl
On Wednesday 19 September 2001 01:21 pm, Greg Ames wrote:
> Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > 2) How long should the queue be? Should we just set some arbitrary
> > constant, defined in mpm_default.h, or should we come up with some
> > heuristic?
>
> Ideally, you would have 0 connections on the queue most
Aaron Bannert wrote:
>
> 2) How long should the queue be? Should we just set some arbitrary constant,
>defined in mpm_default.h, or should we come up with some heuristic?
Ideally, you would have 0 connections on the queue most of the time.
Then, just before some worker gets done with its la
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> +++ worker.c2001/09/19 18:47:31 1.26
> @@ -659,7 +659,16 @@
>signal_workers();
>}
>if (csd != NULL) {
> -ap_queue_push(worker_queue, csd, ptrans);
> +rv = ap_queue_
Aaron Bannert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 06:47:31PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > trawick 01/09/19 11:47:31
> >
> > Modified:server/mpm/worker worker.c
> > Log:
> > if we're gonna trash the connection due to a queue overflow, at the
> > very least
On Wednesday 19 September 2001 12:11 pm, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 06:47:31PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > trawick 01/09/19 11:47:31
> >
> > Modified:server/mpm/worker worker.c
> > Log:
> > if we're gonna trash the connection due to a queue overflow, at th
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 06:47:31PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> trawick 01/09/19 11:47:31
>
> Modified:server/mpm/worker worker.c
> Log:
> if we're gonna trash the connection due to a queue overflow, at the
> very least we should close the socket and write a log message (most
[moving this back on-list]
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 11:45:57AM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> > Anyway, I'm of mixed feelings about the (void) thing, since sometimes we
> > do in fact get bugs from having thrown away a return value that we
> > shouldn't
> Bill Stoddard wrote:
> >
> > It's obvious we are not using the return either way.
>
> But without the cast, someone not conversant with the details
> won't know it normally returns a value; they might think it's
> a void function.
>
> > Less is better so dump the cast :-)
>
> I think the cast i
Bill Stoddard wrote:
>
> It's obvious we are not using the return either way.
But without the cast, someone not conversant with the details
won't know it normally returns a value; they might think it's
a void function.
> Less is better so dump the cast :-)
I think the cast improves understandi
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 06:34:11AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > jwoolley01/09/18 23:34:11
> >
> > Modified:server/mpm/worker worker.c
> > Log:
> > I was kinda hoping those (void)some_function() and (request_rec *)NULL
> > casts would go away before this committed, but al
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 06:34:11AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> jwoolley01/09/18 23:34:11
>
> Modified:server/mpm/worker worker.c
> Log:
> I was kinda hoping those (void)some_function() and (request_rec *)NULL
> casts would go away before this committed, but alas I didn't say
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 06:34:11AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> jwoolley01/09/18 23:34:11
>
> Modified:server/mpm/worker worker.c
> Log:
> I was kinda hoping those (void)some_function() and (request_rec *)NULL
> casts would go away before this committed, but alas I didn't say
On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
>
> This will break things. We will no longer be keeping track of the listener, which
> is a bad thing. I will fix this later this weekend, but the worker MPM is broken
> now.
its working for me. was broken before, with this config:
StartServers
I probably should have mentioned in the comment that the reason I made
the comment was that it broke when I changed it to 0. :)
And I assume the first question in my comment is true? That is:
"ap_threads_per_child includes the listener thread"
-aaron
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 06:29:49PM -0700, Ry
On Saturday 25 August 2001 18:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Ryan Bloom wrote:
> > This will break things. We will no longer be keeping track of the
> > listener, which is a bad thing. I will fix this later this weekend, but
> > the worker MPM is broken now.
>
> its working
This will break things. We will no longer be keeping track of the listener, which
is a bad thing. I will fix this later this weekend, but the worker MPM is broken
now.
Ryan
On Saturday 25 August 2001 18:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> dougm 01/08/25 18:17:32
>
> Modified:server/mpm
101 - 137 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
