Hi,
A better solution could be to add some () around all the x1 in the
CONDFLAG_, RULEFLAG_, ...
This would be more invasive but would prevent potential similar future
issues.
I proposed the more simple solution below.
CJ
Le 25/08/2015 18:57, jaillet...@apache.org a écrit :
Author:
I see that, but the assumption is that the reason why the size
would have changed is that someone edited the httpd.conf file and
added another balancer. At that point, the more logical thing
would be to wipe the slate clean (as we do in other places
where certain values in the slotmem != what we
+1
On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:57 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com wrote:
Now the more complete patch (including bump):
Index: modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
===
--- modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
The whole intent of the dynamic capability of balancer manage,
plus the persistence of it, is to allow changes to be done
to the reverse proxy setup w/o requiring any changes to
the config at all. It allows it to be reconfigured dynamically,
either via the manager or some other mechanism. It's to
With this commit the overall size of the storage slot does not change,
the slot is attached and if it has enough room (growth margin) for the
new configuration, it is used (like with the balancer-manager),
otherwise the restart fails.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Yann Ylavic
On Aug 25, 2015, at 10:41 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see the difference between the configuration via
balancer-manager or file+graceful-restart, both can change the number
of balancers/members AND the settings while children are running.
I'd kind of agree if we
Late declarations, all fixed now in r1697392
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Aug 24, 2015, at 9:23 AM, Stefan Eissing
stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de wrote:
Just a tiny question how the senior guys here do to:
If I build httpd in
The advantage of using the balancer-manager to add a member is that
failures won't kill httpd, whereas failing to add member or balancer
via the configuration file (no space left) stops httpd (now
documented).
To avoid that, maybe could we use non-shared (per child) memory in
this case, like in
On Aug 24, 2015, at 9:23 AM, Stefan Eissing stefan.eiss...@greenbytes.de
wrote:
Just a tiny question how the senior guys here do to:
If I build httpd in maintainer-mode (which I want), the test framework will
no longer build since it inherits the compiler flags from apxs, I assume.
When 1st configured, Apache sees how many balancers there are
set in the config file. It then pads that amount by growth to
allow for the to-be-added dynamic addition of new balancers via
the balancer manager (ala adding members).
The assumption is that if the actual config file is changed,
then
I don't see the difference between the configuration via
balancer-manager or file+graceful-restart, both can change the number
of balancers/members AND the settings while children are running.
I'd kind of agree if we were talking about non-graceful restarts or
first startup, we could add a new
I think the current state of 2.2.31 breaks existing 2.2.x configuration prior
to 2.2.31.
Prior to 2.2.31 you could do the following:
Proxy Balancer://proxy1
BalancerMember ajp://127.0.0.1:7001
BalancerMember ajp://127.0.0.2:7002
/Proxy
virtualhost *:80
ProxyPass / balancer://proxy1/
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 11:39 PM, Christophe JAILLET
christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
Le 24/08/2015 11:18, Yann Ylavic a écrit :
I don't know if memcached can be configured to always close the
connections when done (I guess so), but since the minimal TTL is 1
second, we could end up
On 08/24/2015 11:12 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Jan Kaluža jkal...@redhat.com wrote:
2) Increment proxy_lb_workers according to number of workers in balancer
when using ProxyPass /foobar/
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I see that, but the assumption is that the reason why the size
would have changed is that someone edited the httpd.conf file and
added another balancer.
That's the only way to add a balancer AFAICT, the manager allows to
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Jan Kaluža jkal...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/24/2015 11:12 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
I tested the below which seems to work.
Hm, this reserves the slots in scoreboard even when the balancers are not
used in the virtualhost, or am I wrong?
Correct, but there
Of course it requires a minor bump.
Regards
Rüdiger
-Original Message-
From: Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
Sent: Dienstag, 25. August 2015 11:39
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RE: PR 58267: Regression in 2.2.31 caused by r1680920
How about the following patch? It uses the
How about the following patch? It uses the server_rec of the server that
originally created the configuration item.
Index: modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
===
--- modules/proxy/proxy_util.c (revision 1697578)
+++
Ok, I see that warning flags vary on platforms. That's natural. However if our
most common (I assume) dev platform does not enable the superset of all, then
we get errors/warnings continuously as people will check in code that fails
elsewhere. And I do not think that adding things like
#ifndef
Gregg,
I just checked in changes that should fix the warnings you mentioned. Thanks
for reviewing this. As to the SERVER_PROTOCOL, I have no idea yet what may
cause this.
//Stefan
Am 25.08.2015 um 06:11 schrieb Gregg Smith g...@gknw.net:
Hi,
On 8/24/2015 9:29 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
On Aug 25, 2015, at 2:15 PM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I see that, but the assumption is that the reason why the size
would have changed is that someone edited the httpd.conf file and
added another
I don't understand this at all... I add new balancers and members
all the time and do restarts and power cycles and never lose anything.
What do you mean by some sort of size check failing?? The size of
the slot should *never* change.
On Aug 21, 2015, at 8:34 AM, yla...@apache.org wrote:
How and when do ALIGNED_PROXY_BALANCER_SHARED_SIZE and conf-max_balancers
change???
On Aug 21, 2015, at 8:34 AM, yla...@apache.org wrote:
Author: ylavic
Date: Fri Aug 21 12:34:02 2015
New Revision: 1696960
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1696960
Log:
mod_proxy_balancer: Fix balancers and
Stefan,
Changes worked great. Thanks.
Gregg
On 8/25/2015 3:43 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
Gregg,
I just checked in changes that should fix the warnings you mentioned. Thanks
for reviewing this. As to the SERVER_PROTOCOL, I have no idea yet what may
cause this.
//Stefan
Am 25.08.2015 um
On Aug 24, 2015 11:43 PM, Gregg Smith g...@gknw.net wrote:
On 8/24/2015 9:29 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
I hope this works for everyone. The next weeks might be a good time to
think about it and propose any changes and correct my mistakes.
There are two things that go bump on my lowest non-eol
Plus CHANGES:
Index: CHANGES
===
--- CHANGES (revision 1697578)
+++ CHANGES (working copy)
@@ -1,8 +1,10 @@
-*- coding: utf-8 -*-
Changes with Apache 2.2.32
+ *)
Well, if one adds a new balancer before restarting, at post_config
time conf-balancers-nelts is +1 wrt the previous load...
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
But the number of balancers does not change yet... And when it
is implemented the overall size of
G/Morning,
Herewith an svn diff that implements line-by-line initialization of
three structures (no idea if there's a technical term for it) in place
of the list method now used, e.g struct x = { , , , }.
I acknowledge upfront that 'my' somewhat dated compiler cannot handle
the list method,
On 08/25/2015 11:39 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group wrote:
How about the following patch? It uses the server_rec of the server that
originally created the configuration item.
This looks like good strategy. I've verified that the patch fixes this
issue and does not break anything when
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Jan Kaluža jkal...@redhat.com wrote:
On 08/25/2015 11:39 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group wrote:
How about the following patch? It uses the server_rec of the server that
originally created the configuration item.
This looks like good strategy. I've verified
On 08/25/2015 02:41 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group wrote:
Thanks for the pointer. It is missing because I removed it by accident when
excluding some debug code I setup locally for analysing the issue from the
patch I posted. I will post a proper version and if you agree put it in STATUS
Looks good to me... Even though this is 2.2.x I did some quick
and dirty testing :)
On Aug 25, 2015, at 5:44 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com wrote:
Of course it requires a minor bump.
Regards
Rüdiger
-Original Message-
From: Plüm, Rüdiger,
Is it possible that Jim is talking about adding new stuff via the balancer
manager and Yann about adding new stuff to the config file and doing a graceful
restart?
Regards
Rüdiger
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
Sent: Dienstag, 25. August 2015 14:12
At every startup, in balancer_post_config:
conf-max_balancers = conf-balancers-nelts + conf-bgrowth;
which means that if you add a balancer and restart, storage-create()
(eg. slotmem_create) will try to find an existing slot with this ID
and the exact ALIGNED_PROXY_BALANCER_SHARED_SIZE *
But the number of balancers does not change yet... And when it
is implemented the overall size of the storage slot should *never*
change. It must be constant, ala the scoreboard.
On Aug 25, 2015, at 8:39 AM, Yann Ylavic ylavic@gmail.com wrote:
At every startup, in balancer_post_config:
Thanks for the pointer. It is missing because I removed it by accident when
excluding some debug code I setup locally for analysing the issue from the
patch I posted. I will post a proper version and if you agree put it in STATUS
for 2.2.x. As far as I can tell this change only applies to
Now the more complete patch (including bump):
Index: modules/proxy/proxy_util.c
===
--- modules/proxy/proxy_util.c (revision 1697578)
+++ modules/proxy/proxy_util.c (working copy)
@@ -1460,6 +1460,7 @@
(*worker)-flush_packets
You mean via changing the config file? If so, then all bets
are off. You change the config file and restart then Apache
should start off w/ a clean slate. Even so, you need to handle
freeing the old shared mem segment and creating a brand new one
with the correct size... Trying to use the old one
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group
ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com wrote:
I think the current state of 2.2.31 breaks existing 2.2.x configuration prior
to 2.2.31.
Prior to 2.2.31 you could do the following:
Proxy Balancer://proxy1
BalancerMember ajp://127.0.0.1:7001
Hm, what's the point of the balancers and balancer-workers growth margin then?
The first time the configration is loaded we create enough room for
adding new balancers/workers, and on (graceful) restart we wouldn't
use this space?
That's also how the balancer-manager works when adding a new worker
On 8/25/2015 10:11 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Again, if the slotmem exists and is persisted, the assumption
is that THAT is what the admin wants, and when Apache restarts,
THAT is the running config they desire. If there are changes
to the reverse proxy setup, the assumption must be we are
On 8/25/2015 5:57 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
On Aug 24, 2015 11:43 PM, Gregg Smithg...@gknw.net wrote:
On 8/24/2015 9:29 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote:
I hope this works for everyone. The next weeks might be a good time to
think about it and propose any changes and correct my mistakes.
There
42 matches
Mail list logo
