On 10/06/2008 10:18 PM, Greg Ames wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Ruediger Pluem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> On 10/06/2008 04:42 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> Subj says it all... >> Thanks for doing RM Jim. So c'mon guys. There must be someone >> out there that reviews the remaining patch that misses only >> *one* vote. >> > > what do I need for a minimal config to test it and see a behavior change? I > tried this, proxying to a different port on the same server, but couldn't > get the back end connections to stay alive for more than a few seconds with > the old code. > > <Proxy balancer://mycluster> > BalancerMember http://localhost:8093 keepalive=on smax=2 ttl=1 > </Proxy> > ProxyPass /proxy balancer://mycluster/
Thanks for reviewing. First of all I guess you should increase the KeepAliveTimeout to a large value like 5 minutes to make observations easier. Furthermore I would increase the ttl parameter of your BalancerMember to something like 30. The above configuration makes only sense if you are using a threaded MPM like worker / event / WINNT with more than 2 threads per process. Then start your httpd with a limitation to one process (-X or ServerLimit 1) and try to do 3 requests to /proxy in parallel e.g. with telnet or nc. Afterwards you should have 3 backend connections of which one should vanish about 30 seconds after your requests. Regards Rüdiger
