On Sep 7, 2007, at 6:20 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 09/07/2007 03:03 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Sep 7, 2007, at 6:29 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I think I have patched it. Could you try it?
Ahh... this is much nicer that my idea of breaking out
the data struct defs from the rest
(without each one having lines and lines of 'extern foo'
sillyness) without leaking them out anyplace
else.
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
If you can dodge
On Sep 10, 2007, at 6:01 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
Also the scoreboard is a limiting factor for this. The number of
available
scoreboard entries is determined during the configuration phase of the
startup (it cannot even be changed during graceful starts, this is
why we
add some
On Sep 10, 2007, at 6:37 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
For example what about adding:
static APR_OPTIONAL_FN_TYPE(ap_proxy_lb_worker_size)
*proxy_lb_worker_size;
and use a void * in scoreboard and an int for the size?
For me this sounds fine, but I would guess that Jim doesn't like
the
On Sep 10, 2007, at 8:24 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Sep 10, 2007, at 6:37 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
For example what about adding:
static APR_OPTIONAL_FN_TYPE(ap_proxy_lb_worker_size)
*proxy_lb_worker_size;
and use a void * in scoreboard and an int
On Sep 10, 2007, at 9:18 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Auftrag von Vinicius Petrucci
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. September 2007 18:09
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: mod_proxy_balancer
Well, debugging a little bit more...
On Sep 10, 2007, at 10:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean. mod_proxy does, in child_init,
the calls to create those scoreboard entries. It does
so via ap_proxy_initialize_worker_share(). No matter
what, the -s is set to:
worker-s
On Sep 10, 2007, at 10:37 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
typedef struct ap_sb_handle_t ap_sb_handle_t;
@@ -181,7 +175,7 @@
AP_DECLARE(worker_score *) ap_get_scoreboard_worker(int x, int y);
AP_DECLARE(process_score *) ap_get_scoreboard_process(int x);
AP_DECLARE(global_score *)
On Sep 10, 2007, at 10:42 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
Gesendet: Montag, 10. September 2007 16:06
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: mod_proxy_balancer
Regarding the 2nd one... the:
+else
On Sep 10, 2007, at 11:08 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
Sorry for being a pain in the neck with this topic :-)
:)
It just seems that we're spending so much time on something
which was envisioned as a quick, logical fix to trunk
which could then be backported to 2.2. But it's getting
On Sep 10, 2007, at 12:19 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Well that just because I am thinking that the size of
proxy_worker_stat
could be changed by a balancer, like adding extra bytes to
proxy_worker_stat.
That is what 'void *context' is designed to do. Be a place
where unique data can
On Sep 10, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Shaw, Dan wrote:
Sure,
We are going to be implementing BizTalk and BizTalk guaranties
delivery
of messages per their application. One of the first layers is the
transport layer BizTalk listens to for ACK(s) and if the ACK(s) come
from the proxy server then we
or not.
On Sep 10, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Shaw, Dan wrote:
Yes, that is correct TCP/IP transport layer.
Thanks,
Dan
Daniel P. Shaw
Triad Financial
Pro-Tem Contractor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ext: 25106
Ph: 714-799-5106
Start Date: 08-13-2007
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:[EMAIL
What with this and the Win32/apr issues, seems to me that
we should consider a 2.2.7 out soonish :)
On Sep 11, 2007, at 12:09 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
1. IMHO requires a minor bump.
Find a patch that covers all the points you raised below.
More comments?
Requires a major bump. Also destroys all those mystical
other balancers from working as-is, since they
must now be not only
On Sep 11, 2007, at 12:44 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Sep 11, 2007, at 12:09 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
1. IMHO requires a minor bump.
Find a patch that covers all the points you raised below.
More comments?
Requires a major bump. Also destroys all
On Sep 11, 2007, at 1:11 PM, Jeff McAdams wrote:
For the benefit of the list...if there are other developers, in
addition
to Nick, that might be interested in taking a look at this project and
tackling it, let me know and we can certainly talk.
I actually work for a company which is
On Sep 11, 2007, at 12:09 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
AP_DECLARE(lb_score *) ap_get_scoreboard_lb(int lb_num)
{
-if (((lb_num 0) || (lb_limit lb_num))) {
+char *ptr;
+if (((lb_num 0) || (lb_limit lb_num)) || worker_size==0) {
return(NULL); /* Out of range */
On Sep 11, 2007, at 4:04 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 09/11/2007 06:23 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Sep 11, 2007, at 12:09 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
1. IMHO requires a minor bump.
Find a patch that covers all the points you raised below.
More comments?
Requires a major bump
Why doesn't j-f go ahead and commit the revised patch
to trunk and we can address our concerns in the code
instead of email :)
On Sep 11, 2007, at 4:39 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
it will fail to compile after the patch, because lb_score is now an
incomplete type. So I guess in order to keep it backportable we
need to stick with
typedef struct lb_score lb_score;
struct lb_score {
unsigned char data[1024];
};
On Sep 11, 2007, at 5:01 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 09/11/2007 10:51 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I would also suggest that we keep ap_proxy_lb_workers
in proxy_util.c (as it currently is), since even
though its not part of the API, other proxy module
make have a need for it (and again
On Sep 12, 2007, at 3:47 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Looking at the scope of all these static calls, I really believe the
patch is this simple (process-pool survives the entire httpd);
Sorry - scratch that. I wasn't counting the
On Sep 13, 2007, at 12:11 PM, Erik Abele wrote:
On 11.09.2007, at 19:26, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Sep 11, 2007, at 1:11 PM, Jeff McAdams wrote:
For the benefit of the list...if there are other developers, in
addition
to Nick, that might be interested in taking a look at this
project
On Sep 13, 2007, at 12:30 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:45:06 -0700
Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Changes to the request URI must be referred back to the client in the
form of a redirect. Any other choice will cause security holes in
the request chain, somewhere.
Isn't it time for us to remove all remnants of APR_USE_PTHREAD_SERIALIZE
from httpd? :)
On Sep 17, 2007, at 6:58 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
Instead of limiting the number and thus creating them randomly
(according to what traffic happens to hit the server first),
That is part of, I think, both Rüdiger's and my concern.
The benefits are this are really really fuzzy when applied
to
Oh buggers... Yep. apr_poll in most impls returns APR_TIMEUP
if the time limit expires (since poll returns 0).
Can't test on Windows...
On Sep 26, 2007, at 5:40 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
There is a PR (43472, http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/
show_bug.cgi?id=43472)
that the test in
I'd like for us to consider a release of 2.2.7 in October
to address the Windows file handle issues as well
some other fixes that would be useful to get out quickly...
On Sep 26, 2007, at 11:14 AM, Joshua Slive wrote:
On 9/26/07, Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We really need to fix this issue of inappropriate DefaultTypes.
An approach that deals with this without loss of back-compatibility
is to hand the decision to systems administrators:
#to suppress
On Sep 26, 2007, at 12:50 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like for us to consider a release of 2.2.7 in October
to address the Windows file handle issues as well
some other fixes that would be useful to get out quickly...
How about 2 :)
I expect to have Windows
On Sep 26, 2007, at 4:45 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 09/26/2007 07:30 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
In the current log.c code, although the write-end of an initial error
logger is still held by the parent --- until the second logger
process
has kicked off. It seems someone's
On Sep 27, 2007, at 11:04 AM, François wrote:
2007/9/27, Rich Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Furthermore, Apache for Windows will only continue to exist if
there is a steady flow of these volunteers. This (dev@) is the
forum in which they operate. This, also, is not a threat, but a
plain
name than 'foo', huh? :)
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 12:05:58AM +0100, Nick Kew wrote:
RFC2616 is clear that:
1. OPTIONS * is allowed.
2. OPTIONS can be proxied.
However, it's not clear that OPTIONS * can be proxied,
given that there's no natural URL representation of it (* != /*).
The Co-Advisor suite has a
On Oct 1, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:14:14 +0100
Nick Kew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RFC2616 tells us OPTIONS * is basically a simple HTTP ping,
which suggests it could be at a 'lower' level than authconfig
and always be allowed. If there is a reason to deny it,
On Oct 1, 2007, at 11:14 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 16:43:57 +0200
Ruediger Pluem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/01/2007 03:30 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
On 10/1/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[summary of everyone]
No problem.
OK, it's actually applying
!!!)
Well, at least addit_dammit is descriptive :)
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.
On Oct 1, 2007, at 2:17 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
TRACE also does not/should not trace to the filesystem.
So, I think what we should do is use the existing
architecture and have a quick_handler that checks for
the OPTIONS * case and, if so, return DONE.
You can't
On Oct 1, 2007, at 2:18 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 14:12:44 -0400
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, at least addit_dammit is descriptive :)
Aha, so the struct should've been called holdit_dammit!
:)
On Oct 1, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 1, 2007, at 2:17 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
TRACE also does not/should not trace to the filesystem.
So, I think what we should do is use the existing
architecture and have a quick_handler that checks
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 12:05:41PM -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 1, 2007, at 11:02 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
TRACE also does not/should not trace to the filesystem.
So, I think what we should do is use the existing
architecture and have a quick_handler that checks for
the OPTIONS * case
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 03:22:34PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 12:05:41PM -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 1, 2007, at 11:02 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
TRACE also does not/should not trace to the filesystem.
So, I think what we should do is use the existing
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 02:30:30PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Great! That's exactly what I needed to know.
So it seems to me that a map_to_storage to check for
the special case of '*' whereas present action for
all other URIs is the best course of action
On Oct 1, 2007, at 6:52 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Give that some thought :)
One thing I'm pondering is a 2.3.0 alpha in the near future.
If only to give the we stay back at version n.x-1 crowd something
to chew on.
Not to mention that it would be good
On Oct 1, 2007, at 4:07 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
But, as I read it, the '*' in OPTIONS * does not really
mean a Location *... in other words, it's not a URI per se.
OPTIONS * asks for the capabilities of the server itself,
independent of URI... At least, that's
Comments?:
Index: modules/http/http_core.c
===
--- modules/http/http_core.c(revision 581205)
+++ modules/http/http_core.c(working copy)
@@ -234,6 +234,24 @@
return OK;
}
+static int http_send_options(request_rec *r)
+{
On Oct 2, 2007, at 10:10 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
On Oct 2, 2007, at 08:24, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Well, we could do:
o Apache 1.3 and 2.0 deprecated
As part of the support community, I'd like to have this defined
pretty clearly.
I presume it can't mean no more bug fixes or security
On Oct 2, 2007, at 2:36 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On 10/2/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 1, 2007, at 6:52 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Give that some thought :)
One thing I'm pondering is a 2.3.0 alpha in the near future.
If only to give
On Oct 2, 2007, at 2:52 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
So, the first step is to cut out any illusion that new features are
going into 1.3, with a statement like this:
Starting in January 2008, only critical security issues will be
fixed in
Apache HTTP Server versions 1.3.x or 2.0.x.
I honestly
On Oct 2, 2007, at 3:32 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 2, 2007, at 12:23 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
The more I think about this, if Location * is supported at all it
should be the first-applied, global setting of any request, not just
OPTIONS * (there really is no reason for specific
On Oct 2, 2007, at 4:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 2, 2007, at 1:34 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
I was only talking about the OPTIONS /path case. * is a special
case of a true null request -- it should only deal with server
capabilities and ignore
On Oct 2, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 2, 2007, at 1:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
Nope. * is not a resource. Since it is impossible to know the
mask of the entire resource space, HTTP does not require that
Allow be included on OPTIONS * responses. Just committed a fix.
On Oct 2, 2007, at 5:15 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/02/2007 10:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: fielding
Date: Tue Oct 2 13:36:47 2007
New Revision: 581374
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=581374view=rev
Log:
Reduce the last change to a minimum, since OPTIONS * does not
On Oct 2, 2007, at 5:56 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Slightly off topic, but this gives me the idea that we could use
OPTIONS * as some kind of ping / health check for pooled connections
in mod_proxy_http before sending a request (at least in the reverse
proxy case before sending a request that
On Oct 3, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
On 10/3/07, Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't care what the uptake graph says. I don't care what people
outside this project mailing list think, period, about this project.
And if five years from now there are three or more
On Oct 5, 2007, at 9:24 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/05/2007 02:19 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Once APR is out, I'll plan on a httpd release too.
There are several backport proposals in the STATUS file
missing only one vote. So I guess it is voting time :-).
I hope to have some
On Oct 5, 2007, at 2:07 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Friday 05 October 2007, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Once APR is out, I'll plan on a httpd release too.
There are several backport proposals in the STATUS file
missing only one vote. So I guess it is voting time :-).
Maybe someone could also
On Oct 5, 2007, at 2:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 5, 2007, at 2:07 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Friday 05 October 2007, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Once APR is out, I'll plan on a httpd release too.
There are several backport proposals in the STATUS file
missing only one vote. So I guess
Thoughts on adding mod_substitute to 2.2.x under experimental?
On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:33 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/09/2007 01:47 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: niq
Date: Mon Oct 8 16:47:35 2007
New Revision: 583002
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=583002view=rev
Log:
mod_proxy_http: Don't unescape/escape forward proxied URLs. Just
On Oct 9, 2007, at 10:58 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 9, 2007, at 5:33 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
+const char *allowed = ~$-_.+!*'(),;:@=/; /* allowed
+reserved
from
+
ap_proxy_canonenc */
Otherwise
On Oct 9, 2007, at 11:04 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:
On Tuesday 09 October 2007 18:13:00 Nick Kew wrote:
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:54:21 +0400
Aleksey Midenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe the line making the connection always 'AP_CONN_CLOSE' on
force-response-1.0 is a erroneous leftover.
On Oct 9, 2007, at 1:49 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 9, 2007, at 12:40 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I might be confused here, but if the response is forced 1.0,
then there are no keepalives in which case we want to *force*
keepalives
On Oct 9, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Joshua Slive wrote:
On 10/9/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All I'm saying is that, iirc, the intent of force-response-1.0 is
to force a 1.0 response and disable keepalives... it was designed
to work around buggy browsers that had problems with 1.1
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=78967
That's a 1997 date, btw :)
On Oct 10, 2007, at 6:01 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:
On Tuesday 09 October 2007 22:49:38 Jim Jagielski wrote:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=78967
That's a 1997 date, btw :)
There were no word about broken browsers in that commit, only about
broken
proxy
On Oct 10, 2007, at 8:38 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:
On Wednesday 10 October 2007 16:25:58 Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 10, 2007, at 6:01 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:
On Tuesday 09 October 2007 22:49:38 Jim Jagielski wrote:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=78967
That's
On Oct 10, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:
And resolution for those who will suffer can be
SetEnvIf Request_Protocol HTTP/1.0 nokeepalive
No unnecessary CPU processing for majority.
Huh? You're adding another conditional that needs
to be checked... And for most cases, where the
On Oct 10, 2007, at 10:08 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:
On Wednesday 10 October 2007 18:04:47 Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 10, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Aleksey Midenkov wrote:
And resolution for those who will suffer can be
SetEnvIf Request_Protocol HTTP/1.0 nokeepalive
No unnecessary CPU
a URL-encoded string
*/
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.
On Oct 11, 2007, at 3:12 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/11/2007 04:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Thu Oct 11 07:12:02 2007
New Revision: 583829
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=583829view=rev
Log:
Add fix for, as of now, unconfirmed issue...
Modified:
Later versions of 2.2 (starting with 2.2.7) will have Apache
send 'OPTIONS *' instead of the 'GET /' which will make
it easier for you to exclude those.
On Oct 17, 2007, at 7:08 AM, Marten Lehmann wrote:
Hello,
See:
http://wiki.apache.org/httpd/InternalDummyConnection
When the default vhost
On Oct 20, 2007, at 4:59 PM, Vincent Bray wrote:
Hullo,
I'm attempting to document this module but can't figure out what the f
(flatten) flag does (bucket brigade munging makes my eyes cross). Any
clues?
Say you are looking for 'foo' and have a bucket that
contains 'jimfoojag'. The fast
On Oct 20, 2007, at 7:02 AM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
Hi all!
We've been annoyed by the fact that the status page as served by
mod_status only shows the first 64 bytes of the current requests
for a couple of years now.
We know that it's only meant to be a hint, not the complete request
On Oct 22, 2007, at 12:57 PM, Vincent Bray wrote:
On 22/10/2007, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Say you are looking for 'foo' and have a bucket that
contains 'jimfoojag'. The fast way to handle this would
be to split off 3 buckets from this, one containing
'jim', the other containing
On Oct 22, 2007, at 1:42 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Say you are looking for 'foo' and have a bucket that
contains 'jimfoojag'. The fast way to handle this would
be to split off 3 buckets from this, one containing
'jim', the other containing 'jag' and the middle one
On Oct 22, 2007, at 7:20 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
like 2.0/2.2/trunk
I'm looking for a conceptual +1 out there.
You got it. Conceptual +1 :)
On Oct 23, 2007, at 10:21 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On 10/23/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 22, 2007, at 7:20 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
like 2.0/2.2/trunk
I'm looking for a conceptual +1 out there.
You got it. Conceptual +1 :)
Thanks ;) Kind of silly I realize, but I
On Oct 23, 2007, at 7:34 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Alternative opinions?
Alternative implementations are welcomed.
On Oct 24, 2007, at 8:54 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 23, 2007, at 7:34 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Alternative opinions?
Alternative implementations are welcomed.
Certainly one trade-off would be speed over space; having
pid_table an actual (C) array of pids. When setting we would
On Oct 24, 2007, at 9:49 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
Should I look at something like the above?
please ;)
I did a quick and dirty profile and we do save space (of
course, plus it's static space, as in non-growing) and
speed as well, even worse case.
Looking at the below... testing as we speak:
Index: main/http_main.c
===
--- main/http_main.c(revision 587509)
+++ main/http_main.c(working copy)
@@ -362,7 +362,7 @@
/*
* Parent process local storage of child pids
*/
On Oct 24, 2007, at 10:20 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Looking at the below... testing as we speak:
Testing past and placed it on a test server which gets
hit with goodly amounts of traffic. So far, so good :)
Will give 24hrs and commit.
On Oct 25, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:00:40 +0200
Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, on further reflection, I think it would be better to
fall back to old behaviour in this case. The difficulty is that
this redirection catches cases
On Oct 25, 2007, at 11:00 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
I think this is the problem: When a child is reaped normally after
exiting due to MaxSpareServers or MaxRequestsPerChild, it remains in
the scoreboard with status set to SERVER_DEAD, and it is removed from
the pid table.
Often that slot will be
On Oct 26, 2007, at 7:32 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On 10/25/07, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 25, 2007, at 11:00 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
I think this is the problem: When a child is reaped normally after
exiting due to MaxSpareServers or MaxRequestsPerChild, it remains
On Oct 26, 2007, at 7:32 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
sure; I'm lacking cycles at the moment to start looking through the
code for potential fallout; hope to start looking soon
by the by, I'll develop the (minor) patch while also stepping
through as well...
On Oct 26, 2007, at 8:13 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
sure; I'm lacking cycles at the moment to start looking through the
code for potential fallout; hope to start looking soon
I spent just a little bit of time, but the current code
has a mishmash of logic checking for pid == 0 or SERVER_DEAD
Should have review cycles over the weekend...
On Oct 24, 2007, at 9:37 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On 10/22/07, Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
like 2.0/2.2/trunk
attached is an updated patch for the boil-the-ocean flavor; at the
bottom is a tiny alternative
some ways to slice through
On Oct 28, 2007, at 9:09 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
As far as I remember there was a desire to release 2.2.7 soon as 2.2.6
introduced some incompatibilities with mod_fastcgi and mod_perl on
Windows due
to changes to avoid file descriptor leaks on Windows. Other Bill
worked hard
on the
On Oct 28, 2007, at 4:12 AM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Paul Querna wrote:
-0.9 on enabling this by default in mod_includes. Make it
possible to
turn it on via httpd.conf, but never on by default
I agree.
And it should have huge warning signs, and a long
On Oct 29, 2007, at 10:26 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
On 10/29/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Mon Oct 29 05:42:13 2007
New Revision: 589602
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=589602view=rev
Log:
When setting status to SERVER_DEAD, reset pid as well.
On Oct 24, 2007, at 9:37 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
I vote for the small patch, and canl also throw in a spell check for
that last comment above.
proxydate_13-v2.txt
Both look good and pass tests, but I also prefer, and vote +1 for,
the small patch :)
On Oct 29, 2007, at 5:44 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
* The second is more complex. Because of the order of changes
to trunk, it needs the first as prerequisite. To make a separate
change for it would necessarily invalidate the other patch.
There are far too many interlinked combinations
On Oct 30, 2007, at 4:02 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 10/30/2007 08:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 22, 2007, at 9:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The other option, of course, would be to keep the small
buffer but have some some sort of config directive that
indicates whether you want
For those interested, check out
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=590641view=rev
pasts tests and works as expected, at least in my limited
testing :)
Again, the main focus in this was to resolve the issue in a
2.2-friendly way. So I'd like to get additional feedback
with that in mind before
On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:42 AM, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote:
For those interested, check out
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=590641view=rev
pasts tests and works as expected, at least in my limited
testing :)
Again, the main focus
Thanks... changed on people so it'll update at the next rsync
On Nov 7, 2007, at 9:31 AM, Guenter Knauf wrote:
Hi,
the file / link:
http://www.apache.org/dist/httpd/CURRENT-IS-2.2.4
seems no longer correct.
Guen.
On Nov 13, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
When the MPM process handling the connection is or will be exiting, we
can incorrectly tell the client that the connection will be held open
after the current request. This can result in user intervention
(retry the POST?) or failures for some
401 - 500 of 4498 matches
Mail list logo
