Stas Bekman wrote:
Since 99.9% chances are that the there will be no conference in
October,
Have I missed something? www.apachecon.com still shows
ApacheCon/Europe 2001 to be held in Dublin in October. Has this been
cancelled?
--
Sebastian Bergmann Measure Traffic
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having multiple processes each with multiple threads provides for FAR
more robustness than just a single process with multiple threads.
ya know, i'm not really convinced of the desirability of this explanation
anymore. maybe the hypothetical buggy
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 12:10:30PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
The way I see it, each process has a single pool instance as the parent
for all the threads. Resetting or destroying that pool should
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
Why are we so desperate in opting out the child-pool creation?
I don't really have problems with a child pool for each thread. Actually,
it will make the dynamic locking a lot easier to implement if it stays.
all threads MUST have their own private
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
The way I see it, each process has a single pool instance as the parent
for all the threads. Resetting or destroying that pool should effectively
kill all threads. What am I missing?
how does a thread kill another thread?
-dean
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
The correct fix, as I see it, is to kill off the interprocess
accept lock by removing the possibility of having other processes
in a *threaded* MPM. -- justin
That architecture was explored in detail by Netscape. It isn't reliable
and
I think I misremembered 19.4.6 in RFC 2616. The Content-Length: needs to
be updated to be sent on with a dechunked proxy request, since proxies
must remove transfer-coding.
That doesn't get sent as a trailer.
Chuck
On Tuesday, July 17, 2001, at 12:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, I
Yes, here is the patch I committed to fix this problem...
Bill
Fix problem handling FLUSH bucket in the chunked encoding filter.
Module was calling ap_rwrite() followed by ap_rflush() but the
served content was not being displayed in the browser. Inspection
of the output stream revealed
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Brian Pane wrote:
Is there anything that actually uses the
headers_out or err_headers_out fields in
the request_rec that's created for a subrequest?
Anything written to these fields appears to
be discarded upon completion of the subrequest.
We could save a couple of
Hi,
After being bitten by make_exports and friends a few times
I decided to look into fixing it.
The results are attached.
I think this will be a usefull replacement for the
build_exports/make_exports in httpd.
Sander
make_exports.awk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Brian Pane wrote:
Is there anything that actually uses the
headers_out or err_headers_out fields in
the request_rec that's created for a subrequest?
Anything written to these fields appears to
be discarded upon completion of the subrequest.
We could
Sorry, I forgot to mention how to run it, although
it is very simple.
From httpd-2.0 do:
$ awk -f make_exports.awk include/*.h srclib/*/include/*.h exports.c
That's all.
Sander [who is very late and typing this while leaving...]
Hi,
After being bitten by make_exports and friends a few
+1
Ryan
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
Sorry, I forgot to mention how to run it, although
it is very simple.
From httpd-2.0 do:
$ awk -f make_exports.awk include/*.h srclib/*/include/*.h exports.c
That's all.
Sander [who is very late and typing this while leaving...]
The reason that the call to ap_run_pre_mpm is required in every
mpm is that it is replacing the call to ap_create_scoreboard.
ap_create_scoreboard gets called by the hook instead, and other functions
can be registered to executed in relation to the create_scoreboard call.
regards,
--
Cody
Normally this would be done (in POSIX) with pthread_cancel(), passing it
the pthread_t from the other thread.
Unfortunately, this is not a part of APR because many of the current OS
implementations of this mechanism will leak resources (aparently in the
kernel), and that is bad.
-aaron
On
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 01:29:47AM -0700, dean gaudet wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
Why are we so desperate in opting out the child-pool creation?
I don't really have problems with a child pool for each thread. Actually,
it will make the dynamic locking a lot easier
Uh...you knew that already, didn't you... duh...
jeez now i'm the smartass ;)
-aaron
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 08:43:18AM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote:
Normally this would be done (in POSIX) with pthread_cancel(), passing it
the pthread_t from the other thread.
Unfortunately, this is not a
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 01:29:47AM -0700, dean gaudet wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
Why are we so desperate in opting out the child-pool creation?
I don't really have problems with a child pool for each thread. Actually,
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:13 AM
I believe that the problem is that the threaded code is creating the
pool, and not advertising it to the thread itself. This is an easy thing
to fix. I do not agree that every APR app that uses threads should have
to create
During the build, I get the following:
...
Making all in misc/unix
make[3]: Entering directory
`/home/austin/cvs/httpd-2.0/srclib/apr/misc/unix'
make[4]: Entering directory
`/home/austin/cvs/httpd-2.0/srclib/apr/misc/unix'
/bin/sh /home/austin/cvs/httpd-2.0/srclib/apr/libtool --silent
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:13 AM
I believe that the problem is that the threaded code is creating the
pool, and not advertising it to the thread itself. This is an easy thing
to fix. I do not agree that every APR app that uses threads
Stuffy nose.
--
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-796-9023
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Gonyou, Austin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:35 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Cannob build lastnights
I'm not sure that the alternative is workable, either.
At the time of the fork, when the child process gets a snapshot of
the parent's memory, it's possible that some thread other than the one
invoking fork could be halfway through registering a new resource (e.g.,
file descriptor) in its
We have hit an impass in my mind. Dean and I are saying that having each
thread have it's own pool is a requirement. Not just for httpd, but for
anything using pools. Dean, if I am mis-interpreting you, then I am
sorry, and please correct me.
Aaron, you disagree. you want each app to
On Tuesday, July 17, 2001, at 08:40 AM, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Yes, here is the patch I committed to fix this problem...
Fixed it in the output filter. There's also a problem with the input
filter, which is also the cause of the problems with
http://www.apple.com/macosx/ in the proxy. The
Aaron Bannert wrote:
I'm not sure that the alternative is workable, either.
At the time of the fork, when the child process gets a snapshot of
the parent's memory, it's possible that some thread other than the one
invoking fork could be halfway through registering a new resource (e.g.,
file
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 10:17:01AM -0700, Brian Pane wrote:
Aaron Bannert wrote:
I'm not sure that the alternative is workable, either.
At the time of the fork, when the child process gets a snapshot of
the parent's memory, it's possible that some thread other than the one
invoking fork
Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 10:17:01AM -0700, Brian Pane wrote:
Aaron Bannert wrote:
I'm not sure that the alternative is workable, either.
At the time of the fork, when the child process gets a snapshot of
the parent's memory, it's possible that some thread other than the
Yay...It's happy now!
--
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-796-9023
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Gonyou, Austin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:41 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Cannot build
Hi,
If this is the wrong list please let me know...
Heres' the setup of apache_1.3.20 and redhat linux 7.1
Users's home dir is in /home but is a symlink to some other place (ie,
/home/foobar - /users/r/foobar) which is managed by amd (from
http://www.am-utils.org/).
Apache has been setup with
I found that to do this properly, I had to make sure the dirs were owned to
the process running HTTPD. Not sure why, that's the only thing that seemed
to fix it. Either that or 777 all the way down to the userdir. No good there
either. I know it's simpler than that though.
--
Austin Gonyou
Is the state WANT_TRL (awaiting trailers) in the dechunk filter really
necessary? Can't we just read all this after the end of the chunked
body, and just complete the transaction, and return to WANT_HDR state?
Chuck Murcko
Topsail Group
http://www.topsail.org/
Greg Ames wrote:
Brian e-mailed me earlier today because he noticed the httpd processes on
daedalus were starting to grow. They were up to around 10-12M when he
noticed it, so he restarted the server.
We were back up to 10M per process with MaxRequestsPerChild at 400, so I
bounced the
Will that cause any hanging of the child processes if that happens? In the
sense that data allocated for loopback will not be retrieved or flushed at
some point?
--
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-796-9023
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original
I believe this is a bare-bones essential patch required for getting POD
to work correctly under threaded MPM. The apr_recv() may return success
but return 0 length (indicating the pipe is fine, but there were not any
characters to read). Therefore, we should check the returned length
being 1.
:)
all is not lost.
if you assume that you want some form of notification, but you want to
leave it unspecified because you're not sure what each apr thread will be
used for, then you can make a somewhat generic kill off other threads
cleanup.
so for example, when an httpd thread is created it
From: dean gaudet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 6:15 PM
if you assume that you want some form of notification, but you want to
leave it unspecified because you're not sure what each apr thread will be
used for, then you can make a somewhat generic kill off other threads
you might want to disassemble the functions in gdb (or using objdump) to
make sure that gcc emits a single division instruction for the x / 10,
x % 10 expressions -- i forget the cases where it can and can't do this.
the low level div instruction is a two result opcode, quotient and
remainder.
[snip]
that would be registered in the parent thread's pool -- and would only
be invoked by the parent thread.
pools let you do this, you don't need the mutexes for it, you just have to
be explicit about parallelism. (combine that with a root pool per thread
and then we can remove
see modules/mappers/mod_negotiation.c search for fast redirect.
no comment on how clean this is :)
it's something that should be moved to a core routine.
-dean
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Brian Pane wrote:
Is there anything that actually uses the
headers_out or err_headers_out fields in
the
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 01:29:47AM -0700, dean gaudet wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
Why are we so desperate in opting out the child-pool creation?
I don't really have problems with a child pool for each thread. Actually,
Ok... It's not an issue with apache... I just needed to get away from the
office :-)
Just needed to make sure that nosuid wasn't part of the fstab options for
the file system on which apache resides.
I did have to hack (brutally commented out) suexec.c to avoid the tests for
home directories
From: Aaron Bannert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 6:41 PM
[snip]
that would be registered in the parent thread's pool -- and would only
be invoked by the parent thread.
pools let you do this, you don't need the mutexes for it, you just have to
be explicit about
I totally agree, but only as a solution in httpd.
no, everywhere.
I also believe that we should provide this [application-specific requirement]
outside of the basic thread support in APR.
Please allow me to use pseudocode:
void * worker_function(void * opaque_application_data)
[...]
Are you saying you want the thread function to have access to both a
scope pool as well as an allocator pool, in case they are different?
I've officially graduated to the rbb (insert a decent name here) club :-)
Thank you, yes, scope pool defines teardowns such as cleanups,
while
That architecture was explored in detail by Netscape. It isn't reliable
and slows your web server to a crawl whenever dynamic content is produced.
It should only be used for static file servers and caching gateways, and
people implementing those might as well use an in-kernel server like
dean gaudet wrote:
you might want to disassemble the functions in gdb (or using objdump) to
make sure that gcc emits a single division instruction for the x / 10,
x % 10 expressions -- i forget the cases where it can and can't do this.
the low level div instruction is a two result opcode,
dean gaudet wrote:
see modules/mappers/mod_negotiation.c search for fast redirect.
no comment on how clean this is :)
it's something that should be moved to a core routine.
As a side-effect of the table overlays that this code does, it
code can 'promote' anything that another module has
On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Fine... but does that mean we don't want to actually clean out the
dozens of file descriptors that aren't needed from a threaded parent
process when we spawn a child (such as a CGI)?
we do already (or we're supposed to) through all the
49 matches
Mail list logo
