Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] Add reply_header_add

2016-03-14 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 03/14/2016 05:46 PM, Nathan Hoad wrote: > The attached patch implements reply_header_add, for adding HTTP > headers to reply objects as they're sent to the client. Thank you for this useful addition. Unfortunately, it needs quite a bit of work. * Please _carefully_ review your

[squid-dev] [PATCH] Add reply_header_add

2016-03-14 Thread Nathan Hoad
Hello, The attached patch implements reply_header_add, for adding HTTP headers to reply objects as they're sent to the client. This work is submitted on behalf of Bloomberg L.P. Thank you, Nathan. Implement reply_header_add, the HTTP reply equivalent of request_header_add. This work is

Re: [squid-dev] [PREVIEW] Free AccessLogEntry::url when needed

2016-03-14 Thread Nathan Hoad
Hello, Attached is a first attempt at converting the AccessLogEntry::url member to an SBuf. It's definitely resulted in more data copies - just about all sources are still char *. I'm not sure how I can actually avoid those, aside from converting them to SBuf as well, which would mean modifying

Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] assertion failed: Write.cc:41: "!ccb->active()"

2016-03-14 Thread Amos Jeffries
On 15/03/2016 10:41 a.m., Alex Rousskov wrote: > On 03/10/2016 02:35 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: >> Amos, do you want us to port take2 to v3.5? The take1 patch for v3.5 is >> enough to fix the known assertion. Take2 fixes that assertion as well, >> but it is bigger because it also fixes design

Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] assertion failed: Write.cc:41: "!ccb->active()"

2016-03-14 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 03/10/2016 02:35 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: > Amos, do you want us to port take2 to v3.5? The take1 patch for v3.5 is > enough to fix the known assertion. Take2 fixes that assertion as well, > but it is bigger because it also fixes design problems that may lead to > other bugs in v3.5. Which one

Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] assertion failed: Write.cc:41: "!ccb->active()"

2016-03-14 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 03/14/2016 02:58 PM, Christos Tsantilas wrote: > On 03/14/2016 06:33 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: >> The only remaining doubt in my mind is the combination of delayedReply >> and fssHandleDataRequest state. The above code appears to assume that, >> in fssHandleDataRequest, delayedReply is either

Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] assertion failed: Write.cc:41: "!ccb->active()"

2016-03-14 Thread Christos Tsantilas
On 03/14/2016 06:33 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: On 03/13/2016 01:57 PM, Christos Tsantilas wrote: On 03/10/2016 11:35 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: On 03/10/2016 12:14 PM, Christos Tsantilas wrote: if (master->serverState == fssHandleDataRequest) { +if (!master->userDataDone) { ...

[squid-dev] [RFC][PATCH] Bug4438 second attempt: give MemBlob its own pools

2016-03-14 Thread Kinkie
Hi all, this second attempt at bug4438 tries a different approach: by giving MemBlob its own pools and having a hard initialization dependency in MemBlob's allocating function, instead of relying on memAllocString. Known side-effects: - allows to tune memblob sizes according to actual use

Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] assertion failed: Write.cc:41: "!ccb->active()"

2016-03-14 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 03/13/2016 10:17 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote: > * stopOriginWait() does not make sense in English. Not my expertise area, but it does make sense to me. "Wait" can be a noun as in "we had a long wait" (as suggested by Google). Would you prefer stopOriginWaiting() accompanied by

Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] assertion failed: Write.cc:41: "!ccb->active()"

2016-03-14 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 03/13/2016 10:17 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote: > On 14/03/2016 8:57 a.m., Christos Tsantilas wrote: >> On 03/10/2016 11:35 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: >>> The above logic looks correct to me, but I feel like I am reading an >>> inside-out code. Please consider this instead: >> I did not follow your

Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] assertion failed: Write.cc:41: "!ccb->active()"

2016-03-14 Thread Alex Rousskov
On 03/13/2016 01:57 PM, Christos Tsantilas wrote: > On 03/10/2016 11:35 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: >> On 03/10/2016 12:14 PM, Christos Tsantilas wrote: >>> if (master->serverState == fssHandleDataRequest) { >>> +if (!master->userDataDone) { >> ... >>> +

Re: [squid-dev] [PATCH] assertion failed: Write.cc:41: "!ccb->active()"

2016-03-14 Thread Christos Tsantilas
On 03/14/2016 06:17 AM, Amos Jeffries wrote: On 14/03/2016 8:57 a.m., Christos Tsantilas wrote: Hi all, I made all of the fixes requested by Alex. Please see below for my comments. On 03/10/2016 11:35 PM, Alex Rousskov wrote: On 03/10/2016 12:14 PM, Christos Tsantilas wrote: if