... we need the MPM module perchild ...
... http://mpm-itk.sesse.net/ ...
The mpm-itk is what we search,
Thanks
Hello,
We have an internal project where we need the MPM module perchild. The
Apache 2.0 documentation says that the development is not completed. I
talked to my boss and he says I could take maybe any necessary residual
activities, (depending on the size). Therefore, the following questions
2009/11/23 christian4apa...@lists.muthpartners.de:
Hello,
We have an internal project where we need the MPM module perchild. The
Apache 2.0 documentation says that the development is not completed. I
talked to my boss and he says I could take maybe any necessary residual
activities
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:40 AM,
christian4apa...@lists.muthpartners.de wrote:
Hello,
We have an internal project where we need the MPM module perchild. The
Apache 2.0 documentation says that the development is not completed. I
talked to my boss and he says I could take maybe any necessary
I would like to discuss a collaborative effort to get this module working.
-Original Message-
From: christian4apa...@lists.muthpartners.de
[mailto:christian4apa...@lists.muthpartners.de]
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 3:40 AM
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: MPM-Module perchild
Hello
2009/11/23 Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:40 AM,
christian4apa...@lists.muthpartners.de wrote:
Hello,
We have an internal project where we need the MPM module perchild. The
Apache 2.0 documentation says that the development is not completed. I
talked to my boss
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.3/mod/mod_privileges.html (in future httpd 2.4)
FWIW, contrary to what is suggested by documentation for
mod_privileges, I would anticipate that modules which embed a Python
interpreter such as mod_python and mod_wsgi are not going to be
On 06/01/2007 09:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Fri Jun 1 12:28:31 2007
New Revision: 543583
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=543583
Log:
Create work-in-progress branch
Modified:
[Let's continue the discussion privately from now on as it's becoming
less relevant for the httpd project...]
On 2/2/07, Arnold Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
You do not need a secret, but the users who may changed are specified.
In our setup user 'www-data', which has no privileges
not intend to work
anyone up. I have been trying to find a solution to the problem of
shared hosting with a dynamic language such as PHP. I found the old
perchild MPM and it appears it is not being maintained or there was
possibly a design problem. I would like to know two things.
1
such as PHP. I found the old
perchild MPM and it appears it is not being maintained or there was
possibly a design problem. I would like to know two things.
1. Is there a mechanism (other than suexec) that allows functionality
similar to perchild, that will allow a uid to be assigned on a per
request
with. But this is difficult to pull off with mass hosting.
We tried
the perchild, but starting a new apache process for just about each
request, promoted serious performance issues (I don't have the figures
at hand, but it wasn't an option) as well as not being stable.
It's not common for a setup like
permissions for
others, prevents other users from accessing the files. We recommend
users to set privileges on 660, but this is not always the case.
We tried
the perchild, but starting a new apache process for just about each
request, promoted serious performance issues (I don't have the figures
to the problem of
shared hosting with a dynamic language such as PHP. I found the old
perchild MPM and it appears it is not being maintained or there was
possibly a design problem. I would like to know two things.
1. Is there a mechanism (other than suexec) that allows functionality
for the list
based on searching through the archives, but I do not intend to work
anyone up. I have been trying to find a solution to the problem of
shared hosting with a dynamic language such as PHP. I found the old
perchild MPM and it appears it is not being maintained or there was
possibly a design
gotten the impression this may be a sore subject for the list
based on searching through the archives, but I do not intend to work
anyone up. I have been trying to find a solution to the problem of
shared hosting with a dynamic language such as PHP. I found the old
perchild MPM and it appears
hosting users'. We want all files,
PHP files as well as HTML files, images, etc, to be owned by the shared
hosting user without privileges for others (660). For Apache to handle a
request, it needs to run under that user instead of www-data. We tried
the perchild, but starting a new apache process
with a dynamic language such as PHP. I found the old
perchild MPM and it appears it is not being maintained or there was
possibly a design problem. I would like to know two things.
1. Is there a mechanism (other than suexec) that allows functionality
similar to perchild, that will allow a uid
I have gotten the impression this may be a sore subject for the list based on
searching through the archives, but I do not intend to work anyone up. I have
been trying to find a solution to the problem of shared hosting with a dynamic
language such as PHP. I found the old perchild MPM
?
The module, at
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/server/mpm/experimental/perchild/
was never ported to the API in trunk.
It uses unix domain sockets to replicate the request into a per-host process.
This is necessary because we don't trust a root process to parse
for a future version of Apache?
The module, at
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/server/mpm/experimental/perchild/
was never ported to the API in trunk.
My bad...
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/experimental/perchild/
Patches, as I
On Thu, 2006-31-08 at 16:21 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
It is not clear to me yet whether I should work on metux or perchild.
Unless I missed some major redesign in perchild, you should drop it.
It has some design flaws which make
* Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok. I have the patch against 2.0.48 ... I will see what I can do with
it.
Yeah, it's quite old. But perhaps you can get it into current 2.2.
Please give us feedback.
cu
--
-
Enrico
to me yet whether I should work on metux or perchild.
I'll give you some feedback once I am able to decide (weeks rather than
days).
cu
--
--gh
* Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
It is not clear to me yet whether I should work on metux or perchild.
Unless I missed some major redesign in perchild, you should drop it.
It has some design flaws which make it insecure. metuxmpm was forked
off to fix them.
cu
* Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm looking at perchild with the aim of getting it working.
maybe you're looking for: http://www.metux.de/mpm
The project has been stalled for quite a while :(
But maybe it's time for revival ?
In STATUS I see:
Get perchild to work on platforms
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 12:59:02PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
The whole idea of passing *sockets* (instead of requests) between
processes only works on very few systems, ie. Linux, BSD and
perhaps some others. So the whole portability issue is useless -
those MPMs only work some Unix'es,
On Wed, 2006-30-08 at 23:02 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2006-30-08 at 12:59 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Guy Hulbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm looking at perchild with the aim of getting it working.
maybe you're
On Sun, 2006-09-07 at 19:30 -0700, Paul Querna wrote:
Guy Hulbert wrote:
I'm looking at perchild with the aim of getting it working.
snip
Yes. It could be broken on linux and all other platforms.
If someone else is working on it then I will focus on testing it.
No one is working
I'm looking at perchild with the aim of getting it working.
In STATUS I see:
Get perchild to work on platforms other than Linux. This will require a
portable mechanism to pass data and file/socket descriptors between
vhost child groups.
But I am lead to believe (from the users list
Guy Hulbert wrote:
I'm looking at perchild with the aim of getting it working.
In STATUS I see:
Get perchild to work on platforms other than Linux. This will require a
portable mechanism to pass data and file/socket descriptors between
vhost child groups.
But I am lead to believe (from
The problem is: SSL is *NOT* usable for virtual hosting. You need an
separate socket for each SSL vhost, so you'll probably prefere
several independent httpd's - maybe then stripped down w/o any vhost support.
You're right - SSL is not usable for name-based vhosts. However it
should be fine
Nick Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]:03
GMT-5
The problem is: SSL is *NOT* usable for virtual hosting. You need an
separate socket for each SSL vhost, so you'll probably prefere
several independent httpd's - maybe then stripped down w/o any vhost
support.
You're right - SSL is not
At 07:24 AM 2/10/2005, Leif W wrote:
Hi. I hang out mostly on the users list, but have played with basic
HTTPS configuration (using SSL or TLS). As I understand, HTTPS works
fine with any VirtualHost, so long as it is based on a unique ip:port
combination. That is the current alternative to
* Nick Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry to resurrect this thread, but IMHO (as someone who's an appalling
C developer), we really really need perchild or something like it to
work. Having tried MetuxMPM (and got annoyed with its inability to deal
with SSL), I believe some serious
Sorry to resurrect this thread, but IMHO (as someone who's an appalling
C developer), we really really need perchild or something like it to
work. Having tried MetuxMPM (and got annoyed with its inability to deal
with SSL), I believe some serious work needs to be done here.
Unfortunately, I
* Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I only see patches for 2.0.48 and .49. Do you have something against
Subversion Trunk? Have you tried it against 2.1 yet?
not yet.
we all have very plenty time. the maillist is full of people, but 99.9%
only lurking :(
snip
Then be active on
interested it.
Instead of shipping our multiplexer mpm at least as 'experimental'
(remember: its already in production use for quite a long time),
there's still just the misdesigned perchild.
Then be active on this mailing list, never stop pushing the code, and it
has a good chance of getting
* Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have had an idea for replacing the perchild MPM boggling around inside
my head for awhile now. This is an idea for a different architecture to
allowing different UIDs to serve httpd requests. I am looking for all
feedback with my proposed
protocol.
Bye,
Ivan
- Original Message -
Subject: Re: RFC for a Perchild-like-MPM
From: Gustavo A. Baratto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26-11-2004 3:18
I think the only part missing right now is the ability to compile
Apache to function as a FastCGI client, and accept
I think the only part missing right now is the ability to compile
Apache to function as a FastCGI client, and accept requests over
FastCGI instead of HTTP. That can be a full version of Apache,
or a slimmed-down version (e.g. with no input/output filters).
It is a great idea use FastCGI's
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:42:20 +, Ivan Ristic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leif W wrote:
which was last released as version 2.4.2 on
2003-11-24. Does it still work with Apache httpd 2.0.x?
Works fine with httpd 2.0.x in my tests (mod_fastcgi 2.4.2, I
didn't try the more recent
Max Bowsher wrote:
Quoting Ivan Ristic ivanr webkreator com (2004-11-17 17:31:39 GMT):
I've used FastCGI to give individual
users their own PHP engines (since PHP now comes with FastCGI protocol
support built-in).
This sounds useful - would you be willing to share some config file
Andrew Stribblehill, Thursday, November 18, 2004 07:53
Quoting Ivan Ristic [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2004-11-17 17:31:39 GMT):
Paul Querna wrote:
Are you familiar with FastCGI? My first impression is that most of
what you envision is possible today with FastCGI, or would be
possible
Leif W wrote:
Andrew Stribblehill, Thursday, November 18, 2004 07:53
Quoting Ivan Ristic [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2004-11-17 17:31:39 GMT):
Paul Querna wrote:
Are you familiar with FastCGI? My first impression is that most of
what you envision is possible today with FastCGI, or would be
Ivan Ristic, Friday, November 19, 2004 12:42
Leif W wrote:
Andrew Stribblehill, Thursday, November 18, 2004 07:53
Quoting Ivan Ristic [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2004-11-17 17:31:39
GMT):
Paul Querna wrote:
Are you familiar with FastCGI? My first impression is that most
of
what you
Quoting Ivan Ristic [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2004-11-17 17:31:39 GMT):
Paul Querna wrote:
I have had an idea for replacing the perchild MPM boggling around inside
my head for awhile now. This is an idea for a different architecture to
allowing different UIDs to serve httpd requests. I am
Andrew Stribblehill wrote:
Quoting Ivan Ristic [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2004-11-17 17:31:39 GMT):
Paul Querna wrote:
I have had an idea for replacing the perchild MPM boggling around inside
my head for awhile now. This is an idea for a different architecture to
allowing different UIDs to serve
Quoting Ivan Ristic ivanr webkreator com (2004-11-17 17:31:39 GMT):
I've used FastCGI to give individual
users their own PHP engines (since PHP now comes with FastCGI protocol
support built-in).
This sounds useful - would you be willing to share some config file samples?
Max.
I have had an idea for replacing the perchild MPM boggling around inside
my head for awhile now. This is an idea for a different architecture to
allowing different UIDs to serve httpd requests. I am looking for all
feedback with my proposed approach.
First, we start with a concept I am
Paul Querna wrote:
I have had an idea for replacing the perchild MPM boggling around inside
my head for awhile now. This is an idea for a different architecture to
allowing different UIDs to serve httpd requests. I am looking for all
feedback with my proposed approach.
Are you familiar
could get it working. My need is to be able to run mod_php
as root. (and before I get torched, I am well aware of the security
risks.) Which I can not do with suexec. It would probably be easier to
break suexec than make perchild work, but I don't like that plan.
Running a seperate instance
I apologize if this is the wrong forum. I saw in the documentation that the perchild
mpm development has ceased. I have looked on apache.org for info but did not find
anything. I am curious if anyone in here can tell me where else I might look for
information on why it stopped, as I would like
On Thu, 20 May 2004, Binam, Jesse wrote:
I apologize if this is the wrong forum. I saw in the documentation that
the perchild mpm development has ceased. I have looked on apache.org for
info but did not find anything. I am curious if anyone in here can tell
me where else I might look
On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 12:25:06PM -0600, Binam, Jesse wrote:
:
: I apologize if this is the wrong forum. I saw in the documentation
: that the perchild mpm development has ceased. I have looked on
: apache.org for info but did not find anything. I am curious if anyone
: in here can tell me where
it working. My need is to be able to run mod_php
as root. (and before I get torched, I am well aware of the security
risks.) Which I can not do with suexec. It would probably be easier to
break suexec than make perchild work, but I don't like that plan.
Jess
-Original Message-
From: Eugene Lee
You might want to try metux MPM instead; it provides similar functionality
and works all right: http://www.metux.de/mpm/
Regards
Sascha
- Original Message -
From: Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: looking for mpm-perchild
On Thu, 20 May 2004, Sascha Kersken wrote:
You might want to try metux MPM instead; it provides similar functionality
and works all right: http://www.metux.de/mpm/
metux... That's the name I keep forgetting.
But you might note that your website is not very useful since the download
link is
Hi,
you are right, it's broken. But this is not my site ;-).
Regards
Sascha
- Original Message -
From: Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 8:55 PM
Subject: Re: looking for mpm-perchild info
On Thu, 20 May 2004, Sascha Kersken wrote
I've been trying to use perchild and I've been looking for information on
whether this is actually work or not. I realize this is an experimental
module but I'm just trying to eliminate the possibility that it's a
configuration problem vs. a broken module.
As soon as I assign more then one
Pablo Yaggi wrote:
It doesn't dump anything, i have this
CoreDumpDirectory /tmp/
and it dumps nothing there.
ok, that looks good so far...
What I saw is that a new process for the site (user pablo)
is being started about 2 seconds all the time and
each process logs what I mention before, so I
., you don't need the fix), assuming
CoreDumpDirectory points to somewhere like /tmp where the non-root user
can create files.
ps. This fix is mainly to os/unix/unixd.c::unixd_setup_child() . That
function is not called by the perchild mpm, so it won't help your situation.
I'm assuming
No, it was running as less privileged user ,
and the version Extranet is just somthing mandrake puted there,
I'm recompiling mandrakes rpms, maybe there's some patch there that stops the dumps,
i'll try
to rebuild the source.
But now I'm trying muxmpm cause somebody told me that perchild
I talked about prctl().
PerChild might need something like that in order to dump on Linux, if it does
its own setuid().
But now I'm trying muxmpm cause somebody told me that perchild it was not
working at all,
I've heard that too.
did you manage to make it work ?
haven't tried it, and I don't
configure --prefix=/usr/local/apache --with-layout=apache \
--with-mpm=perchild \
--with-berkeley-db=/usr \
--enable-mods-shared=charset_lite deflate logio mime_magic usertrack unique_id proxy
proxy_connect proxy_ftp proxy_http suexec ssl most \
--with-ssl=/usr/local/openssl \
--enable-suexec
I forgot this in my last post, output from httpd -V
Server version: Apache-AdvancedExtranetServer/2.0.46
Server built: Jun 20 2003 04:31:08
Server's Module Magic Number: 20020903:3
Architecture: 32-bit
Server compiled with
-D APACHE_MPM_DIR=server/mpm/experimental/perchild
-D
Hi,
well after the chat about worker hungs..., by the way Bill, Cliff did you
check my last post ? the question about the prefork, is it fixable ?
besides is prefork using threads ?
i installed a server with perchild and this is a strip from my error log:
[Fri Jun 20 18
Pablo Yaggi wrote:
besides is prefork using threads ?
prefork does not use threads.
i installed a server with perchild and this is a strip from my error log:
[Fri Jun 20 18:29:52 2003] [notice] child pid 14291 exit signal Segmentation fault (11)
do you have a coredump? We
threads ?
prefork does not use threads.
i installed a server with perchild and this is a strip from my error
log:
[Fri Jun 20 18:29:52 2003] [notice] child pid 14291 exit signal
Segmentation fault (11)
do you have a coredump? We the backtrace from it if so. otherwise, we
can't
is ongoing to make it
functional.
Anyone knows, what I need to make it functional? On what platforms does it
work?
When new releases of apache 2.0 are expected with MPM Perchild working on an
ordinary linux distributives?
Thank in advance,
Admin of DGAP MIPT
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 07:59:42PM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
snip
From http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/perchild.html:
This MPM does not currently work on most platforms.
Right, it does not work. And it has some security flaws.
Work is ongoing to make it functional.
Not
Hi dev,
As I am very interrested in getting perchild or something similair
working.
I've looked at perchild many times, I've never seen it work, thus I looked
at what Enrico Weigelt (from metux.de) is working on.
He has said on this list before, that it's in a somewhat useable state,
he's right
Dear Apache developer,
I try to use Apache's perchild MPM. Unfortunately, it seems to be broken
under Linux. I'm using RedHat 8.0 (glibc-2.2.5, gcc 3.2), took the
latest CVS sources for httpd-2.0, apr and apr-util (today's CVS
checkout), and compiled with the perchild MPM. The following happened
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 06:21:09PM +0100, Dirk Nehring wrote:
snip
I try to use Apache's perchild MPM. Unfortunately, it seems to be broken
under Linux. I'm using RedHat 8.0 (glibc-2.2.5, gcc 3.2), took the
latest CVS sources for httpd-2.0, apr and apr-util (today's CVS
checkout
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 12:22:00AM +0100, Daniel Lorch wrote:
Will perchild work on the next release or are there any other
workarounds to secure php-scripts (module) such as suEXEC and cgis?
Yes, there is mod_cgiwrap/mod_phpcgiwrap which will transparently wrap scripts
into the user's
Can somebody give me hint how to get Apache 2.0.43, perchild
and mod_php4 running to do some testing?
When I try to connect with http://192.168.0.1
I will get no answer (browser ist loading, loading, loading
httpd.conf:
Listen 80
ServerAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ServerName 192.168.0.1:80
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002, Jochen Kächelin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can somebody give me hint how to get Apache 2.0.43, perchild
and mod_php4 running to do some testing?
perchild is broken right now. Unless you're willing to do some coding,
don't expect it to work :/
However, it appears that you're
Can somebody give me hint how to get Apache 2.0.43, perchild
and mod_php4 running to do some testing?
JE perchild is broken right now. Unless you're willing to do some coding,
JE don't expect it to work :/
Will perchild work on the next release or are there any other
workarounds to secure php
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 10:57:32PM +0100, Jochen Kächelin wrote:
Will perchild work on the next release or are there any other
workarounds to secure php-scripts (module) such as suEXEC and cgis?
if you *need* mod_php instances that run as seperate users the
easiest solution is to reverse proxy
hi,
Will perchild work on the next release or are there any other
workarounds to secure php-scripts (module) such as suEXEC and cgis?
Yes, there is mod_cgiwrap/mod_phpcgiwrap which will transparently wrap scripts
into the user's UID. Due to lack of time, the original author (Steven Haryanto
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 06:55:13AM +0100, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
hi folks,
something seems to currupt the listener list.
i've running two processes under different uid, both processes
have two listeners. (regenerating pollset before each poll and dumping it)
in one process, the second listener
hi folks,
it seems that under some circumstances the messages for connection
passing between childs are not received at the destination process.
sometimes it also happened, that apr_poll() returned w/o error,
but scan through the listener list does not find the touched socket.
perhaps there's
Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
i've got some trouble with the perchild MPM in httpd-2.0.43.
Especially forwarding connections to other childs seems to be
a little bit buggy.
an little bug in receive_from_other_child() was:
iov[0].iov_base = headers;
iov[0].iov_len
Hi
I Still get error Unable to find process with matching uid/gid.
after compileing 2.43 with
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/experimental/perc
hild/perchild.c
Any ideas?
list does not find the touched socket.
perhaps there's a leak in the listener list. where could it be modified ?
should the pollset better be recreated before each poll ?
What version of the perchild MPM are you using?
There were some significant bugs earlier that I've fixed, but there's
still
I'm usning
Revision 1.136
./configure --enable-so --prefix=/usr/local/apache2.0.43
--with-mpm=perchild
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it seems that under some circumstances the messages for connection
passing between childs are not received
Hmm sorry! I did a bougus error in http.conf ...
When i now start the server i get the following in my shell promt and
the server starts.
What does the debug info tell? Is it all ok or do i have to change
anyting?
[root@mose /usr/local/apache2.0.43/bin]# ./httpd -f
/experimental/perchild/perchild.c
I've tried it yesterday, but there was no new stuff since 2.0.43,
which i'm currently using.
So if you've got something more recent, you're welcomed to post
it to me :)
(i currently like mailing diffs much than using CVS, since ip access
is quite expensive @ my location
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 06:44:13PM +0100, Jonas Eriksson wrote:
snip
/usr/local/apache2.0.43/conf/httpd.conf
[Tue Nov 26 18:35:41 2002] [debug] perchild.c(2007): filling out
child_info_table; UID: 1096, GID: 1094, SD: 4 4, OUTPUT: 5 5, Child Num:
0
[Tue Nov 26 18:35:41 2002] [debug]
version.
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/experimental/perchild/perchild.c
I've tried it yesterday, but there was no new stuff since 2.0.43,
which i'm currently using.
So if you've got something more recent, you're welcomed to post
it to me :)
2.0.43 seems to be tagged
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 07:06:33AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Any debugging you can provide would be much appreciated. perchild
is one of the potentially cool features of 2.0, but at the moment it
I'm trying to understand perchild, so I've had a quick look at the source.
Could you confirm my
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002, James Ponder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 07:06:33AM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Any debugging you can provide would be much appreciated. perchild
is one of the potentially cool features of 2.0, but at the moment it
I'm trying to understand
.
If either are a problem, I suspect that perchild is not the MPM you want
to use.
Perhaps perchild can be improved further to have a set of listener
processes/threads, under the generic apache user id or another secured id,
which accepts connections but does not process them. These threads then
pass
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 08:18:06PM -0500, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
Perhaps perchild can be improved further to have a set of listener
processes/threads, under the generic apache user id or another secured id,
which accepts connections but does not process them. These threads then
pass
each with one listener thread per process, etc. etc.? I was
vague because I don't know best practice.
perhaps we could write an test application to probe it out.
snip
I'd like to ditch the current model of using suexec, to a perchild model.
This is also my plan. I'm using mod_php w/ connection
hi folks
i've got some trouble with the perchild MPM in httpd-2.0.43.
Especially forwarding connections to other childs seems to be
a little bit buggy.
an little bug in receive_from_other_child() was:
iov[0].iov_base = headers;
iov[0].iov_len = HUGE_STRING_LEN;
iov[0].iov_base
Johannes Erdfelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Problem 1:
In worker_thread, there is a variable called csd that is used to get
the new socket from lr-accept_func(). If that variable is NULL, then
the memory for the new socket is allocated in the per-transaction pool.
Unfortunately, the code
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002, Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Johannes Erdfelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Problem 2:
pass_request fills out an iovec with the headers and the body of the
request it wants to pass to another process. It unfortunately uses the
wrong variable for the length
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Johannes Erdfelt wrote:
Perhaps I misunderstood. The patch I had developed (which is broken
because of the problems with the accept lock) just didn't listen on the
socket if it has no chance of answering
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As long as you are doing all this work, there is one more thought that I
have been meaning to implement, but that I never got around to. Currently
perchild doesn't work with SSL, because of when the request is passed off
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
