On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Eric Covener wrote:
> Did this become unnecessary when SetHandler/AddHandler support was
> added for proxy:unix:/ ... configuration?
I think both are orthogonals.
One can use http://localhost/...> to
declare a worker whose connections will be reusable by :
1.Set/
Did this become unnecessary when SetHandler/AddHandler support was
added for proxy:unix:/ ... configuration?
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>> Patch inline.
>>
>> Index: modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
>>
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> Patch inline.
>
> Index: modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
> ===
> --- modules/proxy/proxy_util.c(revision 1588466)
> +++ modules/proxy/proxy_util.c(working copy)
> @@ -1508,32 +1
Patch inline.
Index: modules/proxy/mod_proxy.h
===
--- modules/proxy/mod_proxy.h(revision 1588466)
+++ modules/proxy/mod_proxy.h(working copy)
@@ -605,23 +605,60 @@ typedef __declspec(dllimport) const char *
/* Connection p
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Of course, this doesn't mean that Yann should wait for
>> me... you seem to have a good grasp.
>
I'm coming back here...
After spending some time on this and several patches to impleme
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>
> Maybe we could also require fully qualified URLs for RewriteRule(s) with
> UDS, and avoid the helpers (
>
> mod_rewrite would still need to fully qualify the "unix:" scheme)...
>
mod_rewrite would still need to NOT fully qualify the "unix
Yes, mod_rewrite is patched so that it calls fully_qualify_url() on the
non-UDS part of the URL only.
Either mod_rewrite has to split the URL (and needs mod_proxy's helpers), or
it does not fully qualify on the "unix:" scheme and let mod_proxy fully
qualitfy later (which then needs mod_rewrite's h
On Feb 25, 2014, at 1:26 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> Why are they optional functions?
>
Ignore this question :)
Thx...
I haven't looked over it yet, but I do see that mod_rewrite
is patched... why can't we set that note var and do
all the required magic in mod_proxy? Does mod_rewrite
itself really need to know about "unix:..."??
Why are they optional functions?
On Feb 25, 2014, at 12:18 PM, Yann Ylavic w
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Of course, this doesn't mean that Yann should wait for
> me... you seem to have a good grasp.
The following (attached) patch does the job, but I'm not it is "elegant".
It introduces the new optional ap_proxy_worker_real_url() and
proxy_worke
On Feb 25, 2014, at 9:20 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>
> Only for defined workers, that could be difficult to know.
> So the UDS part should probably be handled in mod_rewrite (ie. not
> fully-qualified).
> It would then be ignored by ap_proxy_pre_request() when a defined
> worker is found (using the
Of course, this doesn't mean that Yann should wait for
me... you seem to have a good grasp.
On Feb 25, 2014, at 10:01 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Now that I understand the issue and the intent, let
> me take a look. There might be a non-obvious but
> elegant solution...
>
> BTW: FWIW I'm traveli
Now that I understand the issue and the intent, let
me take a look. There might be a non-obvious but
elegant solution...
BTW: FWIW I'm traveling the next few days so (1) the T&R
will likely be pushed to next week and (2) I'll be mostly
unavail until next week anyway
On Feb 25, 2014, at 9:20 AM, Y
On Feb 25, 2014, at 8:15 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
>> Sent: Dienstag, 25. Februar 2014 14:09
>> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: mod_rewrite/proxy U
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>> If fact it works if I use the following rule (sorry to have not
>> thought about it before) :
>>
>> RewriteRule "^/(.*)$" "http://localhost/$1"; [P]
>> http://localhost"; disablere
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> If fact it works if I use the following rule (sorry to have not
> thought about it before) :
>
> RewriteRule "^/(.*)$" "http://localhost/$1"; [P]
> http://localhost"; disablereuse=off>
>
>
> Since the worker is registered without t
If fact it works if I use the following rule (sorry to have not
thought about it before) :
RewriteRule "^/(.*)$" "http://localhost/$1"; [P]
http://localhost"; disablereuse=off>
Since the worker is registered without the UDS path, it's URL the http one.
However this raises the questio
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
> Sent: Dienstag, 25. Februar 2014 14:09
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: mod_rewrite/proxy UDS issues
>
>
> On Feb 25, 2014, at 7:26 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>
> > On
On Feb 25, 2014, at 7:26 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 24, 2014, at 10:05 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>>
>>> I use the following config :
>>>
>>>
>>>ServerName localhost:60080
>>>
>>>RewriteEngine on
>>>RewriteRule "^/(.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 24, 2014, at 10:05 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>>
>>> I use the following config :
>>>
>>>
>>> ServerName localhost:60080
>>>
>>> RewriteEngine on
>>> RewriteRule "^/(
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Feb 24, 2014, at 10:05 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>
>> I use the following config :
>>
>>
>> ServerName localhost:60080
>>
>> RewriteEngine on
>> RewriteRule "^/(.*)$" "unix:/tmp/backend.sock|http://localhost/$1"; [P,NE]
>>
>>
On Feb 24, 2014, at 10:05 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> I use the following config :
>
>
> ServerName localhost:60080
>
> RewriteEngine on
> RewriteRule "^/(.*)$" "unix:/tmp/backend.sock|http://localhost/$1"; [P,NE]
>
>http://localhost"; disablereuse=off>
>
>
>
Why the co
What sort of problem? I cannot recreate any...
Why doesn't the magic in ap_proxy_pre_request() looking
for "rewrite-proxy" happen? It should. In any case, I
think if there's a bug, then it's because mod_rewrite
isn't setting that note when needed. Doesn't that
make sense?
On Feb 21, 2014, at 8:56
Helo,
I'm facing some issue(s).while validating mod_rewrite
+proxy
with uds.
Here is my simple conf :
RewriteEngine on
RewriteRule "^/(.*)$" "unix:/tmp/backend.sock|http://localhost/$1";
[P,NE]
http://localhost"; disablereuse=off>
First, the (pseudo-)scheme "unix:" is unknown
24 matches
Mail list logo
