On 4/1/08 5:35 AM, Issac Goldstand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think we're even talking about on-the-fly stuff for the Lua
parser engine, so Perl can do everything that Lua can.
I am.
The biggest problems I have with current system are:
-Every module does things differently
-No real
On 4/1/08 9:40 AM, Torsten Foertsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know one can do that. But a VHost has a server_rec, maybe a separate
error_log and access_log, etc. Those cannot be created at request time. That
is what I meant.
Well
I was hacking around with the idea that the selection of
On 4/1/08 11:21 AM, Torsten Foertsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue 01 Apr 2008, Akins, Brian wrote:
In pseudo config, like niq is suggesting, you could have something like:
If HTTP_HEADER{Host} =~ cnn\.com$ || TCPPort == 8080
#cnn specific stuff here...
DocumentRoot /htdocs/cnn
On 4/2/08 8:44 AM, Rich Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May I request, if mod_wombat becomes a standard module, that it be given a
name not quite so calculated to make the newbie disable it without a second
glance.
I think the reason wombat was chosen is because mod_lua was taken. In
On 4/2/08 5:50 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ixnay on the run-time intensive, slow down the server sorts of changes.
httpd continues to become slower as it becomes more powerful. I know you
are the first one to raise your hand and point out when we are doing too
much
On 4/2/08 5:56 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm pondering this... if we drop per-server ... yet retain the ability
for authors to factor their config info into related config sections...
Yes... Bcs what IO am imagining is something like what I've posted before:
If
On 4/2/08 6:07 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we can finish these out, opening logs with
full privileges. Other merges will happen at run time (or be optimized
when we can accomplish this) per-request.
We already fake per-dir logs with the env stuff in mod_log_config.
--
On 4/3/08 10:47 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll commit the Method
If HTTP_Method == GET
...
/If
;)
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
On 4/3/08 11:38 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If HTTP_Method == GET
...
/If
Slow
Not if the parsing is done at config time and HTTP_Method is handle by a
provider. Some pseudo code:
At config time, the parser would do something like:
On 4/3/08 11:38 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But that *doesn't* mean I don't want it... simply not to replace directory,
file, location or method. Keep in mind you wouldn't have your ErrorLog
opened at startup time, as this is too variant
Unless I'm mistaken, there is
On 4/10/08 7:05 AM, Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This kind of stuff belongs in a
common place.
Doesn't libapreq do this??
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
Was going over some old e-mails. If you guys at apachecon need something to
discuss/argue, how about getting a fastcgi and xendfile implementation into
core httpd?
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
On 4/11/08 10:39 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if APR ships 1.3.0 - would we be prepared to accept 1.3.0 as the new
minimum version, modulo the minor MMN bump?
+1
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
On 4/15/08 12:27 PM, Brad Nicholes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IOW, we may be required to be conservative
when it comes to 1.3.x, 2.0.x or 2.2.x, but the same level of conservatism
shouldn't apply to 2.4 or 3.0.
Which is one of the reasons I think now is the time to completely redo the
On 4/25/08 5:27 AM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- mod_memcached and lots of others do
'key' \0 'value' \0
...
'\0'
I like, and use, this format. However, I do not think we need to
On 4/29/08 3:52 PM, Maxime Petazzoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, feel free to jump in and write down some
ideas!
Some short term ideas:
-Interface/API to allow other modules to run Lua code:
wombat_init(/some/lua/file), wombat_run(some_lua handle) or something
similar. Mod_wombat
What if Vary were much more than just HTTP Vary? It would be nice if the
framework could support the external vary (ie, normal HTTP Vary) as well
as any internal Vary.
To use general mod_disk_cache structure, we currently have something sorta
like this for vary metafiles:
int cache_version
FWIW, we already use apreq for other stuff anyway. Also, it does a lot of
useful stuff that can be exposed via mod_wombat
One of my top things I want is a way to generically register and call
some lua code that takes advantage of resource pools, caching, etc.
No offense to Brian M, but I found
On 5/21/08 12:43 PM, Matthew M. Burke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Akins, Brian wrote:
There is an early version of my efforts floating around - mod_lua_request.
(I can repost it, as well).
I'd be interested in seeing it.
Matt
Remember, this is old and simple...
--
Brian Akins
Chief
How we handle purge:
-Our cache is only disk based, so it is somewhat easier.
-We have a hook that gets called after each cache store - ie, after we write
a vary meta file, after we write a real meta file, after a datafile write
(on close).
-We also have a cache_get_info function that is exported
On 6/2/08 2:02 PM, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please review STATUS and prepare for tarball testing in a coupla
days!
FWIW, if my vote counts:
*htpasswd: Fix salt generation weakness. PR 31440 +1
* mod_unique_id: Convert request time to seconds before before storing it in
+1
--
Okay, started looking at mod_cache and had a question about the way it is
handling providers.
We call ap_cache_get_providers which seems to do a lot of work that we could
probably do at config time rather than run time. Any reason why providers
can't be attached to uri's at config time and avoid
On 6/19/08 5:35 PM, Niklas Edmundsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brian: I remember you talking about some in-house modifications using
DBM or something to track accesses to cached data and using it to find
candidates to remove. Care to share?
On every cache store, we write out to a pipe some
On 7/23/08 2:51 PM, rhiren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can I stop the processing of that request
on the server, so that it does not spend any more time on the document
content processing and frees up the CPU and memory.
Check r-aborted
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital
On 8/4/08 12:59 PM, Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mod_balancer decaying (averaging) the transferred statistics,
so that node-up/recovery doesn't consume all the load.
mod_proxy_ajp sending ping/pong at regular intervals (detecting
node failure before
On 8/4/08 3:41 PM, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*grin*
I've always wondered what usefulness
ap_run_monitor(p)
FWIW, we use the monitor hook all the time... Most of our stuff uses some
shared memory and the monitor hook in parent, but I have considered hacking
something
On 8/28/08 8:45 PM, Jess Holle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Possible solutions include:
Having an option to have a background thread ping the backends rather than
allowing normal requests to do so.
One way to possibly do this is to have a single health checking that's in
the parent that can
On 9/1/08 8:11 AM, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 9:49 AM, Bing Swen wrote:
To my knowledge, the one thread per connection network i/o model
is a
suboptimal use
threads vs. events is certainly not, imo, a finalized debate
yet with a known winner or
On 9/2/08 1:02 PM, bing swen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a little different viewpoint. According to some recent test reports
comparing Apache 2.2 and Nginx 0.6/0.7 (from a blog website admin.), Apache
could do as well as Nginx when there are a few connections each of which
carries many
On 9/2/08 3:15 PM, bing swen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems the test (done by another guy) indeed used an everything plus the
kitchen sink default Apache httpd at first, but then dropping off 3/4 of
all of the default modules (maybe not that much, but only for serving
static pages) seemed
On 9/4/08 4:22 AM, Bing Swen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe you have super-optimized
hardware and system?
Nope, standard off the shelf systems.
So I wonder perhaps next time you guys may bother to take time to also run
Nginx on your platform and tell us how it performs against your httpd
On 9/4/08 2:54 AM, steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Filling gigE and requests/sec aren't targets that concern me as a
user. They sound like nice beanchmarks though...
To some folks, filling a gigE is important. FWIW, I ran some tests
yesterday with about 50K ISDN (384K) speed clients and httpd
Have you tried mod_disk_cache with the cachroot in /dev/shm? Mod_mem_cache,
it seems, is negleted in comparison to the disk one. Using /dev/shm is
basically putting the cache in shared emmory.
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
On 9/21/08 2:17 AM, Bing Swen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But an optimal
network i/o model needs a layer that maps a *request* to a thread, so that a
worker thread (or process) will not have to be tied up entirely with a
single connection during the whole life time of the connection. Instead, a
Got tired of having to set core_private for one bit of info. How does this
look?
Index: server/request.c
===
--- server/request.c(revision 699033)
+++ server/request.c(working copy)
@@ -1907,3 +1907,14 @@
return
On 9/25/08 9:37 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Couple of points, API fn name sucks, can it be ap_request_config_test(r,feat)?
Sure.
Always request-rec based, there should be no need for server rec (two args
are faster than 3).
True.
About your other idea, it's a
On 9/30/08 1:15 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
should we look
at something closer to ap_mpm_query (ap_core_query?) and start adding it a
whole lot of stuff?
+1
Something to ponder; injecting this as-is for 2.2.10 seems rushed.
+1
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations
On 10/7/08 8:49 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure sounds like this is a re-initialization of mysql, with apr and php
fighting for the honors.
I thought the official support of php was fastcgi only in httpd 2.2
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital
On 10/8/08 2:15 PM, Oden Eriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
vhosting does not work very well with apache, without band-aids like fastcgi
etc. that's a shame.
There is a rather lengthy list of reasons why mod_php doesn't work
correctly. AFAIK, the official word has been to use fast-cgi for
On 10/8/08 4:06 PM, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think the approach you are suggesting will work.
I would suggest duplicating the workers at startup, enable/disable in
each balancer to 'move' them.
+1.
Do graceful restarts work correctly with the stock load balancer?
This is getting of topic in dev, but...
On 10/8/08 4:17 PM, Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I've migrated all of my webservers to a mixture of Lighttpd and Nginx,
Why? The apache is bloated and slow argument is just plain incorrect.
(FWIW, I have nothing against eitehr of
On 10/15/08 6:56 PM, Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Obviously, if the loop comes round more than once, then the client comes
into play. This definitely needs to be fixed, it is a big performance issue.
Could a more general purpose optimization be done? I was thinking of a
generic
On 10/18/08 4:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also consider today that a server on broadband can easily spew 1gb/sec
bandwidth
at the client. If this is composed content (or proxied, etc, but not
sendfiled)
it would make sense to allow multiple buffer pages and/or
On 10/20/08 1:19 PM, Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This will make some interesting templating options possible, and will
probably make lives easier for people doing mass hosting.
Seems like a place to get a lot of bug reports as well.
I choose to just use a real template system to
One of the things I've noticed on a practical level, is that forked children
in worker wind up being linearized within themselves to some extent.
Think of how the buffered logs work in mod_log_config (one buffer protected
by a mutex). (I can't think of the correct term for it right now. Basically
On 10/29/08 3:40 PM, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, maybe that is a good thing, since then they would be ported
forward and work on win32 too.
Can you delete open files in win32 yet?? If not, most of my stuff will not
port...
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner
On 10/30/08 12:48 PM, Manik Taneja [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it seems that there is a slow-leak perhaps we might be hitting the
problem that has been described in the following post.
http://www.nabble.com/apr-pools---memory-leaks-td19766166.html
FWIW, we always run with
Seems like your own module would be small and straight forward.
There is a patch floating around for mod_setenvif that adds a filter for it
to act on response headers. That may could be used, depending on the order
things happen. I'd still like this patch to be committed, I can resubmit,
if you
Anyone know anything about status of this?
http://code.google.com/p/modmemcache/
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
On 1/11/09 10:53 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
[ ] Accept mod_fcgid into httpd
+1
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
On 1/28/09 1:25 AM, Paras Fadte plf...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Which tool is the most suitable for profiling Apache ? gprof ? Oprofile ?
I've used oprofile.
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
OT, but will you contribute that to mod_lua ? :)
Based on mod_memcache and mod_wombat . For demonstration only as this uses
our hacked version, but you get the idea how simple this was. Build it in
lua dir like /usr/lib/lua/5.1/apach2/memcache.so
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
On 3/31/09 10:18 AM, Bertrand Mansion bmans...@mamasam.net wrote:
Reading the comments in your code, it seems that mod_lua could benefit
from a better error reporting ?
Perhaps. Or I just needed to actually add error checking Right now I
rely on the lua side to sanity check stuff.
--
On Linux, I've used oprofile to help with my module development.
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
Some ramblings from playing with other servers, particularly varnish and
lighttpd. It would be interesting if we ditched the current configuration
system and just used lua. I know this has been said before, but I've been
doing a bit of playing with mod_lua and I think it it actually doable. We
On 6/3/09 2:09 PM, Joachim Zobel jzo...@heute-morgen.de wrote:
This does IMHO not address any of the problems users usually have and
that are mainly due to a lack of validation.
First of all, I don't really care about normal users, to be honest. Admit
it, I'm not the only one. However, I do
On 6/3/09 2:45 PM, Jorge Schrauwen jorge.schrau...@gmail.com wrote:
I have to admit lua would be more flexible but I think most server
admins have atleast come into contact with XML... while not
necessarily the case with lua.
XML with conditionals. Please, make it stop...
I think we are
Has anyone looked at VCL that varnish uses? That and some playing with
lighttpd's mod_magnet is what rekindled my interest:
http://varnish.projects.linpro.no/wiki/Introduction
http://varnish.projects.linpro.no/wiki/VCLExamples
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media
On 6/3/09 7:50 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com
wrote:
1. There are many and large and complex configurations out in the world.
Which is exactly why I want/need a better way to do them. I'm currently
using a template system to generate them. However I wind up with
On 6/4/09 7:51 AM, Dan Poirier poir...@pobox.com wrote:
and having to write a program to
implement mod_rewrite or a virtual host yourself.
Something like this would be trivial to do:
if prefix_match(r.uri, /foo/) then
return do_redirect(r, http://somewhere.else/;)
end
Okay, not a
On 6/4/09 8:14 AM, Jorge Schrauwen jorge.schrau...@gmail.com wrote:
Like Graham mentioned mod_macro can be of some use here. however since
I'm looping in perl I may as well push the 4 lines needed to httpd
instead of a one line macro replacemen.
Okay, I'm not explaining my self well. I'm
On 6/5/09 11:31 PM, Graham Dumpleton graham.dumple...@gmail.com wrote:
This last example wasn't even related to driving configuration. It was
in practice an actual handler hook implementation for request
processing, not configuration phases.
The way I see it, we have artificially separated
On 6/9/09 7:50 AM, Peter Wang ptr.w...@gmail.com wrote:
8000 may be very specific on my server, i wonder
where can i tuning such a limit.
Yes 8000 is special in the apache response streaming.
Are you using the deprecated mod_php or the supported fastcgi for php?
--
Brian Akins
Chief
On 6/10/09 8:52 AM, Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com wrote:
Or something like that that's sufficiently like what we have now to be easy to
learn, but sufficiently different to be harder to get wrong, and a whole heck
of a lot easier to do dynamic vhosts.
I think Lua (or whatever) could include
On 6/10/09 10:21 AM, Dan Poirier poir...@pobox.com wrote:
That sounds a whole lot like using the config as a runtime.
I'm not sure I follow that. I do like that the config would still look
a lot like it does now, only more flexible.
Even if we kept the same general syntax as now, if we
On 6/18/09 12:57 PM, Bob Ionescu bobsie...@googlemail.com wrote:
DefaultMapping /index.php
AddHandler php_handler .php
Of course, though, php is only supported in fastcgi mode now.
Unrelated to the discussion, but, yes, I will keep saying this over and over
again until I quit seeing
On 6/22/09 10:40 PM, Weibin Yao nbubi...@gmail.com wrote:
I have an idea to mitigate the problem: put the Nginx as a reverse proxy
server in the front of apache.
Or a device that effectively acts as such.
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
On 6/23/09 12:48 AM, Paul Querna p...@querna.org wrote:
Mitagation is the wrong approach.
We all know our architecture is wrong.
Another heretical suggestion:
Lighttpd and nginx are both release under BSD-like licenses.
Hear me out.
I've actually been thinking how possible would it be to
On 7/2/09 8:37 AM, Nick Kew n...@webthing.com wrote:
Not everyone who's concerned right now about slowloris has
iptables at their disposal.
Also, not everyone has access to the real IP very early in the connection
phase. Some load balancers add the IP as a header. Generally speaking,
most
This is how I envisioned the async stuff working.
-Async event thread is used only for input/output of httpd to/from network*
-After we read the headers, we pass the request/connection to the worker
threads. Each request is sticky to a thread. Request stuff may block,
etc, so this thread pool
On 7/7/09 1:02 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Ideally any async implementation should be 100% async end to end. I
don't believe that its necessary though for a single request to be
handled by more than one thread.
True. However, what about things that may be process intensive.
I haven't looked at the code, but +1 for the idea. We had a hack that did
something somewhat similar, but it was gross and in 2.0 - we never used it
in prod.
Is the proxy-timeout for the entire request to be returned, the first byte,
or just an i/o timeout?
--
Brian Akins
On 7/28/09 1:35 PM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de wrote:
I have backported r791454 to 2.2.3 in Debian 4.0 and have received a
report [1] about segfaults with mod_deflate and mod_php (5.2.0).
Isn't php only officially supported via fastcgi?
--
Brian Akins
I found something in proxy and was wondering if it was intentional:
In proxy_balancer, we check the nonce param and clear the params if
incorrect or missing, however, then you can't view it in xml unless you
include the nonce, because the xml param is no longer available.
I was trying to get one
Patches welcome.
On 8/23/09 11:58 PM, tim robertson tim...@email.com wrote:
. Events will
help Apache server handle lots of concurrent connections because currently
Apache cannot handle 10,000 concurrent connections on a low end single core
server without Apache crashing or running very
On 8/25/09 8:47 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I'd like to float that idea again, before I spend any more
time on it...
+1
I've been, umm, struggling with some proxy stuff recently and it's annoying
that 2.2.x and trunk are so different.
One idea:
Can we replace the void
On 8/26/09 3:20 PM, Paul Querna p...@querna.org wrote:
I would write little lua scriptlets that map user agents to two
buckets: supports gzip, doesnt support gzip. store the thing in
mod_cache only twice, instead of once for every user agent.
We do the same basic thing. We are moving
On 9/15/09 3:18 PM, Paul Querna p...@querna.org wrote:
I would prefer to just put it into the log file like Dan did.. not
everyone uses apachectl :)
+1
--
Brian Akins
With all the discussion of mod_fcgid lately (I admit, I did not read all the
threads, so forgive me if we already discussed this), I was wondering if a
different approach would be better.
I know at one time there was work on a mod_proxy_fastcgi. The current trend
in other webservers seems to do
On 10/29/09 9:50 AM, Jeff Trawick traw...@gmail.com wrote:
There has been some interest expressed on this list from the mod_fcgid
user community to manage processes differently (e.g., independent of
load); in general, I'd like to see the proxy+process mgr solution
support requirements that
Did we ever decide what to do about this?
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200801.mbox/%3CC3C353B8.A
60a1%25brian.ak...@turner.com%3e
Did we come up with another solution?
--
Brian Akins
Chief Operations Engineer
Turner Digital Media Technologies
On 10/30/09 1:29 PM, Albert Lash albert.l...@docunext.com wrote:
But in the end, it is awesome for containing memory leaks and
automatically re-spawning fastcgi processes.
An external process-manager can do the same.
My point was do we really want/need this complexity inside httpd?
Also, the
So, after several conversations at Apachecon and on the list, we still have
no real vision of how we want to move ahead with httpd 3.0. Or, if we
do, it's not communicated very well.
Some have suggested we just create a new server project. Others want to keep
hacking away at the current code
On 11/5/09 4:30 PM, Graham Dumpleton graham.dumple...@gmail.com wrote:
Thoughts?
Still digesting, but generally +1 to the entire post.
--
Brian Akins
On 11/9/09 12:32 AM, Brian McCallister bri...@skife.org wrote:
A 3.0, a fundamental architectural shift, would be interesting to
discuss, I am not sure there is a ton of value in it, though, to be
honest.
So I should continue to investigate nginx? ;)
FWIW, nginx delivers on its performance
On 11/9/09 12:52 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
This gives us the option of prefork reliability, and event driven speed,
as required by the admin.
I think if we try to do both, we will wind up with the worst of both worlds.
(Or is it worse??) Blocking/buggy modules should be ran
On 11/9/09 1:18 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
and we know
from the same period of experience from others that a pure event driven
model is useful for shipping static data and not much further.
It works really well for proxy.
--
Brian Akins
On 11/9/09 1:36 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
It works really well for proxy.
Aka static data :)
Nah, we proxy to fastcgi php stuff, http java stuff, some horrid HTTP perl
stuff, etc (Full disclosure, I wrote the horrid perl stuff.)
--
Brian Akins
On 11/9/09 1:40 PM, Brian Akins brian.ak...@turner.com wrote:
On 11/9/09 1:36 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
It works really well for proxy.
Aka static data :)
Nah, we proxy to fastcgi php stuff, http java stuff, some horrid HTTP perl
stuff, etc (Full disclosure, I wrote
On 11/9/09 2:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
These issues are already solved by moving to a Serf core. It is fully
asynchronous.
Okay that's one convert, any others? ;)
That's what Paul and I discussed a lot last week.
My ideal httpd 3.0 is:
Libev + serf + lua
--
Brian Akins
On 11/9/09 3:08 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
2) If you have 10,000 client connections, and some number of sockets
in the system ready for read/write... how do you quickly determine
*which* buckets to poll to get those sockets processed? You don't want
to poll idle
On 11/10/09 1:56 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
But some buckets might be performing gzip or SSL encryption. That
consumes CPU within the network thread.
You could just run x times CPU cores number of network threads. You can't
use more than 100% of a CPU anyway.
The model that some
On 11/10/09 6:20 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to see a few network threads multiplexing all the writing
to clients.
That's what I meant. I just didn't state it properly.
Then take all of *that*, and spread it across several processes for
solid uptime, with a master
On 1/22/10 2:18 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
What you're probably after are piped logs:
The amount of context switches this can create is almost mind boggling...
--
Brian Akins
On 1/22/10 2:39 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Trying to signal all the processes, all the threads, and all the event
loops to close and reopen a file simultaneously simply isn't feasible or
accurate enough to be useful.
Each process (not thread) has an open filehandle with
On 2/5/10 9:39 AM, Dan Poirier poir...@pobox.com wrote:
. E.g. maybe
today I'd like to see all debug trace from authentication, but tomorrow
just see SSL stuff.
+1
--
Brian Akins
On 2/19/10 6:11 PM, Sander Temme scte...@apache.org wrote:
Aside from satisfying your own
curiosity (which is a perfectly valid reason), why invent another one? Or am
I misreading you?
Mod_lua (and mod_wombat before it) has some serious architectural issues.
We've talked about them on the
Is there a particular reason why ProxyPreserveHost is per server and not
per dir? We have some unusual configs and I'm wondering what secret
internals I may be breaking by changing that? The code didn't show anything
obvious.
--
Brian Akins
The hook runner itself should just be in lua. Instead of scripts, you write
lua modules. If a lua module has a function with the correct names (ie,
same as hooks) it uses that:
Ie in my module foo
function fixups( r )
Would get called at fixups, etc.
No need for a state per file,
On 5/12/10 11:09 AM, Brian McCallister bri...@skife.org wrote:
Ah, but what happens when there are multiple functions for same hook?
We could get into magic naming and scanning of global scope, but that
really turns my stomach.
No need. It's easy. Think about it in lua, not C.
Something
101 - 200 of 218 matches
Mail list logo
