Re: simple-conf branch
On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:01:34PM -0700, Greg Stein wrote: Sorry, but I very much disagree. I think back to the old days of access.conf, httpd.conf, and srm.conf. As an administrator, I absolutely detested that layout. I could NEVER figure out which file a given configuration was in. I always had to search, then edit. Some of us have never left that world. Darnit. We've been to the multiple .conf world before. It sucked. We pulled everything back into a single .conf to get the hell outta there. Agreed. Small examples are fine. The default configuration should remain as a single .conf file. +1. -- justin
Re: simple-conf branch
On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 15:01:34 -0700, Greg Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, but I very much disagree. I think back to the old days of access.conf, httpd.conf, and srm.conf. As an administrator, I absolutely detested that layout. I could NEVER figure out which file a given configuration was in. I always had to search, then edit. We've been to the multiple .conf world before. It sucked. We pulled everything back into a single .conf to get the hell outta there. Small examples are fine. The default configuration should remain as a single .conf file. After a few years of running moderate-sized virtual hosting servers (2 to a few hundred) I've settled in on a multiple-file organization for virtual hosts. I use the usual httpd.conf for server-wide settings, but that includes vhost.conf which contains a bunch of virtual host containers that then include configuration files for the various virtual hosts. These days I tend to create a set of directories, like /www/sites/vhost-1.com which then have logs, htdocs, and other supporting directories. What's nice about this is that vhosts are easily portable from one server to another. I've got a script that automatically punches in a new vhost, so I can have one up and running in two minutes. My big project these is a site with a database that's still useful in read-only mode when the database goes down; it's got mirror sites and all kinds of funny details, and we have a runlevel.conf symlink that points to one of several files that let us adapt the system to various degraded states such as database maintainance, software upgrade, etc. That same site also has several test instances, and we have a single configuration file that has all the variables that change between different instances, so it's easy to maintain the conf files in CVS. There are good operational reasons to split up configuration in different files -- if the Apache install can encourage good practices, based on the decade of experience we've had with it, that's a good thing.
Re: [1.3 PATCH] Win32 RewriteLog deadlock
On Apr 2, 2005 2:54 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 05:45 AM 4/2/2005, Jeff Trawick wrote: On Apr 1, 2005 2:17 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 09:16 AM 4/1/2005, Eric Covener wrote: Attempt at a patch using CriticalSection instead of _locking() is attached, but I am by no means a win32 person -- hopefully someone can take a look. However, it will break Windows 9x/ME so, for 1.3, we need at least some detection to decide if we use this solution. I don't have a Win9x box any more to test, but doc says this Requirements Client Requires Windows XP, Windows 2000 Professional, Windows NT Workstation, Windows Me, Windows 98, or Windows 95. Server Requires Windows Server 2003, Windows 2000 Server, or Windows NT Server. Doh!!! TryEnterCriticalSection() is the NT specific API I was thinking about. If this is a blocking EnterCriticalSection(), there is no Win32 version issue. yep; I'll add the patch to STATUS...
Re: simple-conf branch
Admittedly, there are times when having multiple conf files and conf directories makes things much easier. Other time, more difficult. But that is a SysAdmin decision. We should keep with one-true config file for defaults.
Re: simple-conf branch
On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:38:44AM -0400, Paul A. Houle wrote: ... There are good operational reasons to split up configuration in different files -- if the Apache install can encourage good practices, based on the decade of experience we've had with it, that's a good thing. You have a complex series of sites and a deep understanding of configuration and sysadmin issues to keep it manageable. For somebody *new* to this, they need the utmost simplicity. Even a strong sysadmin needs something simple so they can figure out what they're working with and then blend that into their environment. If we shipped a setup similar to yours, most people would cry with frustration trying to figure out where to turn this or that knob. Documentation to help people with configuration issues and ideas can easily be provided for admins who have moved past the single static file website. We already have a lot of documentation. Admittedly, it doesn't describe scenarios like yours, but I'll venture to guess that you're in the few-percent case. I'm more than happy to have our doc folks concentrating on the other 97% :-) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Re: svn commit: r160209 - httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/winnt/child.c
How is this worthless? IIUC, the unix mpm's announce the
creation of each worker. This should remain consistant,
however if I'm mistaken, ignore me.
Bill
At 02:01 PM 4/5/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: stoddard
Date: Tue Apr 5 12:01:09 2005
New Revision: 160209
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=revrev=160209
Log:
Win32: Eliminate useless debug error message
Modified:
httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/winnt/child.c
Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/winnt/child.c
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/winnt/child.c?view=diffr1=160208r2=160209
==
--- httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/winnt/child.c (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/winnt/child.c Tue Apr 5 12:01:09 2005
@@ -739,8 +739,6 @@
int thread_num = (int)thread_num_val;
ap_sb_handle_t *sbh;
-ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_DEBUG, APR_SUCCESS, ap_server_conf,
- Child %d: Worker thread %d starting., my_pid, thread_num);
while (1) {
conn_rec *c;
apr_int32_t disconnected;
@@ -801,8 +799,6 @@
ap_update_child_status_from_indexes(0, thread_num, SERVER_DEAD,
(request_rec *) NULL);
-ap_log_error(APLOG_MARK, APLOG_DEBUG, APR_SUCCESS, ap_server_conf,
- Child %d: Worker thread %d exiting., my_pid, thread_num);
return 0;
}
Re: svn commit: r160209 - httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/winnt/child.c
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: How is this worthless? IIUC, the unix mpm's announce the creation of each worker. Worker, Prefork and Event do not.
Re: simple-conf branch
Greg Stein wrote: On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:38:44AM -0400, Paul A. Houle wrote: ... There are good operational reasons to split up configuration in different files -- if the Apache install can encourage good practices, based on the decade of experience we've had with it, that's a good thing. You have a complex series of sites and a deep understanding of configuration and sysadmin issues to keep it manageable. For somebody *new* to this, they need the utmost simplicity. Even a strong sysadmin needs something simple so they can figure out what they're working with and then blend that into their environment. If we shipped a setup similar to yours, most people would cry with frustration trying to figure out where to turn this or that knob. You mean, like when new users encounter a default Debian Apache installation? /me hides from the Debian users. --Rich
Re: simple-conf branch
What makes matters worse is that the update-apache2-script that apache2 comes with in Debian doesn't seem to work in any situation I've tried it in (or maybe I'm just not using it right), rendering the entire configuration confusing for no substantial reason. That being said, the idea behind the Debian configuration makes things like adding vhosts easy - put them in a file, drop them into sites-enabled, and restart. Definitely easier than adding them to the httpd.conf file by hand (and then having to re-order them when you want one to be the default). One vhost (or set of relevant vhosts) per file, and you can swap in/out at will. Personally, I'm inclined to think this would be useful to new users. It's easier for newbies to worry about one 10-line file at a time, instead of a monolithic 1000-line file (for reference, my httpd.conf from apache1 in Debian is now at 1091 lines, while my apache2.conf is at 394), and for sysadmins, they don't have to worry about where which directive is and whether or not there's an important LoadModule or SetEnvIf somewhere between two unrelated vhosts.On Apr 5, 2005 4:16 PM, Rich Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Greg Stein wrote: On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:38:44AM -0400, Paul A. Houle wrote:...There are good operational reasons to split up configuration indifferentfiles -- if the Apache install can encourage good practices,based on thedecade of experience we've had with it,that's a good thing. You have a complex series of sites and a deep understanding of configuration and sysadmin issues to keep it manageable. For somebody *new* to this, they need the utmost simplicity. Even a strong sysadmin needs something simple so they can figure out what they're working with and then blend that into their environment. If we shipped a setup similar to yours, most people would cry with frustration trying to figure out where to turn this or that knob.You mean, like when new users encounter a default Debian Apacheinstallation?/me hides from the Debian users.--Rich-- Dan Udey
[NOTICE] Tagging 2.0.54, WAS: Re: Time for 2.0.54?
Sander Striker wrote: Hi guys, It's been almost 2 months since 2.0.53. Think it is time for 2.0.54 yet? I'll volunteer to RM if that is a yes ;) Just a heads up: I'm planning on starting the TR of 2.0.54 on thursday night (UTC +1). I would be thankful if someone could start backporting the suggested backports with enough votes in STATUS. If noone has any round tuits, I'll get to it before doing the tag. Thanks, Sander
Re: svn commit: r160209 - httpd/httpd/trunk/server/mpm/winnt/child.c
Paul Querna wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: How is this worthless? IIUC, the unix mpm's announce the creation of each worker. Worker, Prefork and Event do not. Correct. Only Windows logs a debug message for each and every thread created. I added these two debug messages to winnt_mpm a couple of years back to help track down what appeared to be a shutdown bug. Problem actually was that thread creation at startup was failing due to the huge 1MB default stack size on windows; we now log thread creation failure and do our active thread accounting properly; these two debug messages unnecessarily clutter up the error log and we can live w/o them imho. Bill
Re: svn commit: r160240 - httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS
On Apr 5, 2005 7:31 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Author: jim Date: Tue Apr 5 16:31:30 2005 New Revision: 160240 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=revrev=160240 Log: Tested and voted Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS *) several changes to improve logging of connection-oriented errors, including ap_log_cerror() API (needs minor bump in addition to changes below) @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ been committed to trunk. The equivalent patch for 2.0.x is at: http://www.apache.org/~trawick/20reqbody.txt - +1: trawick, jerenkrantz + +1: trawick, jerenkrantz, +1 I assume that second +1 should instead be jim ;)
