Hello, Someone from this list pointed out that he had issues opening *.msg attachment. Now, I re-attach the plain text of the email I sent last week. Hope it works for all of you.
I just want to check the status of the "SO_REUSEPORT" patch. Please let me know if you have any issues backport it. It has already been trunked for 7 months. After several modifications, we think it is ready to go to stable. Also, we have completed tests on all the existing 4 MPMs and different usage cases. Results look good to us. Please let me know. Thanks, Yingqi -----Original Message----- From: Lu, Yingqi [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 9:20 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Time for 2.4.11 I just want to check what the status on the "SO_REUSEPORT" patch is. Do you see any issues backport it? Please let me know. Attached is the email I sent last week on the same topic in case you missed that. Thanks, Yingqi -----Original Message----- From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 4:54 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Time for 2.4.11 Get your backports into STATUS now, and test and vote on the existing (and to-be-entered) proposals asap! > On Jan 13, 2015, at 12:05 PM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: > > Okey dokey... the idea is a T&R on Thurs with a release next Mon/Tues. > >> On Jan 8, 2015, at 6:11 AM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Let's shoot for a T&R next week. The work will keep me warm :) >
From: Lu, Yingqi <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 9:57 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Time for 2.4.11 Hi Jim, Thanks for your email. I think it should not be very hard to back port. After you trunked the original patch last June, I was working with Yann Ylavic last November to fix some minor issues. With current trunked code, there is no major API change to 2.4 version and we have tested with multiple workloads and usage cases for all 4 existing MPMs. It looks good to us. Please note, with current code, there is a new configurable flag called "ListenCoresBucketsRatio". The default value is 0 which means SO_REUSEPORT is disabled. This is different than the original patch. The reason Yann decided to choose the opt-in way because he finds it safer, especially for backports to stable. Given this said, I think it would be a good idea to add some document to introduce the feature and the flag itself. This would allow users to take advantage of this. Please let me know if you have any questions. Again, thanks very much for the help, really appreciated! The whole work can be followed in three threads with name: 1. "[PATCH ASF bugzilla# 55897]prefork_mpm patch with SO_REUSEPORT support" 2. "svn commit: r1599531 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES include/ap_listen.h server/listen.c server/mpm/event/event.c server/mpm/prefork/prefork.c server/mpm/worker/worker.c server/mpm_unix.c" 3. "Listeners buckets and duplication w/ and w/o SO_REUSEPORT on trunk" Thanks, Yingqi -----Original Message----- From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 5:47 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Time for 2.4.11 Let me look... how easy is the backport? > On Jan 8, 2015, at 12:22 PM, Lu, Yingqi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi All, > > Can we make the "SO_REUSEPORT" support into this new stable version? The > first version of the patch was trunked last June. After tests and modifications, I think it is ready to go. > > Please let me know what you think. > > Thanks, > Yingqi > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 3:12 AM > To: httpd > Subject: Time for 2.4.11 > > Let's shoot for a T&R next week. The work will keep me warm :)
