On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Is there any way to accomplish w/o using notes? It's not that
they are especially slow, it's just that they aren't that fast
and, iirc, this could be a tight path.
Simpler solution commited in r1588519.
We don't have to
Hi,
this is the day of resurrections :p
I think I've got a simpler way to address this issue, that is, don't
send unexpected 100-continue to clients due to proxy ping feature.
Here is the patch.
Once again, please object if you don't want me to commit this stuff.
Reagrds,
Yann.
Index:
Is there any way to accomplish w/o using notes? It's not that
they are especially slow, it's just that they aren't that fast
and, iirc, this could be a tight path.
On Apr 4, 2014, at 1:02 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
this is the day of resurrections :p
I think I've got
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Is there any way to accomplish w/o using notes? It's not that
they are especially slow, it's just that they aren't that fast
and, iirc, this could be a tight path.
There surely is, but we can't use the proxy_conn_rec for
This is a once-per-request query, so a note shouldn't be a bad thing.
But I'm wondering if we need a multi-state (and eventually, fold that
into 2.6/3.0 req_req instead)?
Many users have requested that mod_proxy honor -configured- proxypass
backends' 100 responses and defer the 100 response to
I peek this message from another thread and create a new one, since
details may not be relevant in the TR note.
On 11/12/2013 06:56 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:48:16 -0500
Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I intend to TR 2.2.26 tomorrow... post now if that's
an
I peek this message from another thread and create a new one, since
details may not be relevant in the TR note.
On 11/12/2013 06:56 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:48:16 -0500
Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I intend to TR 2.2.26 tomorrow... post now if that's
