The problem is that we need a name for the matching... And we use shm for performance reasons...
On Aug 29, 2014, at 3:33 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 29 Aug 2014, at 21:05, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> FWIW, this is reported in >> >> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53218 >> >> I was thinking of a dual-approach: Increase PROXY_WORKER_MAX_NAME_SIZE >> and making the truncation of the worker name (s->name) non-fatal >> (but logged at ALERT)... >> > > I've been bitten by this quite a few times as well. And always when you least > expect it. > > Wondering if it is time to push long names into a uuid or hash; with a > translation table/db file if needed. > > Dw. > >>> On Aug 29, 2014, at 2:27 PM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I'd like to propose that we bump up PROXY_WORKER_MAX_NAME_SIZE >>> again, both in trunk but also allow for backporting to >>> 2.4.x as well. >>
