The following reply was made to PR mod_proxy/2982; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Marc Slemko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Subject: Re: mod_proxy/2982: %f field of CustomLog should log cache
filename for proxy: requests (fwd)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 14:20:49 -0700 (PDT)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 15:33:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mike Clarkson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: mod_proxy/2982: %f field of CustomLog should log cache filename
for proxy: requests
> State-Changed-From-To: open-closed
> State-Changed-By: marc
> State-Changed-When: Thu Sep 10 01:06:04 PDT 1998
> State-Changed-Why:
> Dupe of PR#2648 by the same author. Please do not keep submitting
> multiple reports on the same thing, especially when there is
> no response logged in the previous entry to a query that
> was asked the day after it was submitted.
I'm sorry about the dupe; a mail on our mail server at our end meant I never
saw the reply from lars. In our case it is useful because we are monitoring
the Apache cache for files and using them when they appear in cache, but
in general logging redundent information seems less useful than logging
potentially useful information that appears nowhere else. It seems to
me the logical interpretation for %f in the case of a proxy: request.
I'm really sorry about the dupe screwup, and I'll be more careful checking
the database for followups.
Many thanks,
Mike.
