Re: patches to mod_proxy (was: Re: mod_perl guide corrections)

2000-09-20 Thread Joe Schaefer
Roger Espel Llima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 03:24:50PM -0400, Joe Schaefer wrote: > > On linux, the ext2 filesystem is VERY efficient at buffering filesystem > > writes (see http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s9-12). If the post data is small > > ( I don't know what the defau

Re: patches to mod_proxy (was: Re: mod_perl guide corrections)

2000-09-20 Thread Roger Espel Llima
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 03:24:50PM -0400, Joe Schaefer wrote: > On linux, the ext2 filesystem is VERY efficient at buffering filesystem > writes (see http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s9-12). If the post data is small > ( I don't know what the default size is, but the FILE buffer for the tmpfile > is ad

Re: patches to mod_proxy (was: Re: mod_perl guide corrections)

2000-09-19 Thread Joe Schaefer
Roger Espel Llima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The patch makes mod_proxy buffer the post data in a temp file > > by setting the (new) ProxyPostMax directive to a positive number. > > If the Content-Length header supplied by Z is greater than this > > number, mod_proxy rejects the post request.

Re: patches to mod_proxy (was: Re: mod_perl guide corrections)

2000-09-19 Thread Roger Espel Llima
Joe Schaefer wrote: > 1) Z requests a dynamic page from A. > > Z -GET 1.1-> A -PROXY-> B -PROXY-> A -CLOSE-> Z > > The current mod_proxy CLOSES the connection from A to Z, > even if Z requests keepalives, and A implements them. This > is bad since subsequent requests for static content (images/