flood STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2002/01/17 01:09:45 $]
Release:
milestone-04: In development
milestone-03: Tagged January 16, 2002
ASF-transfer: Released July 17, 2001
milestone-02: Tagged August 13, 2001
httpd-test/perl-framework STATUS: -*-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2002/03/09 05:22:48 $]
Stuff to do:
* finish the t/TEST exit code issue (ORed with 0x2C if
framework failed)
* change existing tests that frob the DocumentRoot (e.g.,
Hi,
Didn't know how to name that patch.
I've been able to simulate it playing with the preloaded modules.
Basically the child tries to write to logs using corrupt ap_server_conf.
MT.
===
RCS file:
Hi,
I just tagged HEAD as 2.0.36.
One exception:
I tagged support/ab.c rev 1.97 instead of 1.98.
Simply because I think that change deserves some
discussion.
Greg, could you upgrade daedalus to 2_0_36? It
would be nice to see how it holds under load.
Showstoppers we have to take care of
From: Justin Erenkrantz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 25 April 2002 11:42
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 08:31:14AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
dirkx 02/04/25 01:31:14
Modified:support ab.c
Log:
During the 1.3-2.0 migragrion; ab its #defined VERSION own string was
Sander Striker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- atomics compile issue
This bites us on some versions of Linux.
If we cannot resolve this within a reasonable
timeframe I suggest we fall back to the default
implementation on troublesome platforms for this
release*.
Should we
In this context, IPv6-only boxes means boxes with an IPv6 address
but no IPv4 address corresponding to their hostname.
This is an easy change to use the low-order four bytes of the IPv6
address for part of the id when no IPv4 address is available. This
should resolve the most problematic aspect
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Does anyone know anything about this?
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7966
I think this is the same as the showstopper entry in STATUS:
* Incorrect Content-Range headers or invalid 416 HTTP responses
if a filter such as INCLUDES
Ooops, try this one instead... The listener would not start in the previous patch.
Thanks
to Paul Reder for catching this.
Bill
Index: worker.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/httpd-2.0/server/mpm/worker/worker.c,v
retrieving revision
Could someone check if this is valid to fix the problems with httpd-ldap in apache
2.0.35, due to the new APR shared memory treatment?
I have tested this with Apache 2.0.35 and openldap 2.0.23.
Thanks,
Eduardo Garcia.
Index: httpd-ldap/ldap-cache/util_ldap_cache.c
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Would someone care to see if this fixes the worker MPM performance problem reported
earlier on the list (request-per-second dropping when clients exceeded
threadsperchild)?
This patch defers starting the listener untill -all- the
From: Aaron Bannert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Would someone care to see if this fixes the worker MPM performance
problem reported
earlier on the list (request-per-second dropping when clients
exceeded
threadsperchild)?
Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 10:30:48AM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
In this context, IPv6-only boxes means boxes with an IPv6 address
but no IPv4 address corresponding to their hostname.
This is an easy change to use the low-order four bytes of the
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 09:57:04AM -0700, Ryan Bloom wrote:
* When I say queue I really mean stack. In thinking about this
problem
over the last few days I realized that we should convert back to a
true
LIFO, otherwise it is possible for a request to sit at the back of the
stack for a
Can we agree to follow convention and change the mod_mem_cache
and mod_disk_cache names to mod_cache_mem and mod_cache_disk?
This follows precedent set by mod_dav (mod_dav_fs) and mod_proxy
(mod_proxy_connect, _ftp and _http.)
Seeing as neither module is documented, and they remain
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Would someone care to see if this fixes the worker MPM performance problem reported
earlier on the list (request-per-second dropping when clients exceeded
threadsperchild)?
This patch defers starting the listener untill -all-
From: Aaron Bannert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Would someone care to see if this fixes the worker MPM performance
problem reported
earlier on the list (request-per-second dropping when clients
exceeded
+1. Only I really don't like mod_mem_cache or mod_cache_mem as the module can also
+cache
open fds.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 1:10 PM
Subject: mod_foo_ families
Can we agree to follow
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 01:32:40PM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
I think he is referring to the order the threads are dispatched. Ideally you want
the last
active thread to get the next work (ie, LIFO dispatching).
Actually Ryan was correct, and I meant FIFO.
There are two approaches to the
Actually, what I am seeing is that Apache realizes that it needs to start more
worker threads (because available worker threads falls below min_spare_threads)
and during the time where new processes and threads are being started, requests
being processed (i.e. rps) decreases to near zero (5-12
Oh worthy RM... would you consider a humble request to roll in the following
disconnected build targets into release .36? We don't build them by default,
at this point, but there have been requests for how to build? both of these
modules. As it stands after this patch, they simply need to copy
Done.
Sander
-Original Message-
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 25 April 2002 20:23
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fwd: cvs commit: httpd-2.0 Apache.dsw
Oh worthy RM... would you consider a humble request to roll in the following
disconnected build
Can we move mod_deflate out of experimental? It seems to be quite stable...
Bill
Is it possible, maybe already done, to *tag* the request in some way as
it is pushed into the stack(queue) and maintain some kind of hash or
other mechanism, based on time(age of request), to pull the oldest first
back out, perform service then discard?
I suppose that's essentially a FIFO
From http_protocol.c...
* 1. Call setup_client_block() near the beginning of the request
*handler. This will set up all the necessary properties, and will
*return either OK, or an error code. If the latter, the module should
*return that error code. The second parameter selects
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Please lets not go overboard with these types of optimizations. This could get out
of
control quickly. Having code that is easy to read, understand and maintain is -much-
more
important than saving a a few extra cycles.
In a previous job where I had a lot of low
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Please lets not go overboard with these types of optimizations. This could get
out of
control quickly. Having code that is easy to read, understand and maintain is
-much-
more
important than saving a a few extra cycles.
In a previous job where I had a lot of low
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 04:39:18PM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
From http_protocol.c...
* 1. Call setup_client_block() near the beginning of the request
*handler. This will set up all the necessary properties, and will
*return either OK, or an error code. If the latter, the module
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 03:04:44PM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
Can we move mod_deflate out of experimental? It seems to be quite stable...
Probably. However, there have been reports of its failure when
used with Subversion. I've never had a chance to isolate the problem
to identify if
..since Thursday, 25-Apr-2002 17:22:00 PDT. Nothing unusual to report. Let's
hope it stays that way.
Greg
Greg Ames [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The other is a sendfile assert that we've seen intermittently for a long time.
Jeff thinks the FreeBSD kernel is giving us a return value of 0 with no bytes
sent. I think we might be passing a length or an offset that's too big, perhaps
when the site is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RELEASE NON-SHOWSTOPPERS BUT WOULD BE REAL NICE TO WRAP THESE UP:
+
+* The worker MPM's fdqueue needs to be turned back into a FIFO.
+ Status: Aaron volunteers.
+
+
+* The worker MPM should not accept more connections than it
+
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 10:36:25PM -0700, Brian Pane wrote:
+* The worker MPM's fdqueue needs to be turned back into a FIFO.
+ Status: Aaron volunteers.
...
+* The worker MPM should not accept more connections than it
+ currently has available workers. Instead, the
33 matches
Mail list logo
