Hi Yann, 2018-01-07 20:41 GMT+01:00 Yann Ylavic <[email protected]>:
> Hi Luca, > > On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 3:39 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > Author: elukey > > Date: Sun Jan 7 14:39:47 2018 > > New Revision: 1820466 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1820466&view=rev > > Log: > > event.xml: add a note about lingering close > > > > Modified: > > httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/docs/manual/mod/event.xml > > > > Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/docs/manual/mod/event.xml > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/ > docs/manual/mod/event.xml?rev=1820466&r1=1820465&r2=1820466&view=diff > > ============================================================ > ================== > > --- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/docs/manual/mod/event.xml (original) > > +++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/docs/manual/mod/event.xml Sun Jan 7 > 14:39:47 2018 > > @@ -94,7 +94,9 @@ of the <directive>AsyncRequestWorkerFact > > sockets and they can be re-used to serve other > requests.</dd> > > > > <dt>Closing</dt> > > + [...] The lingering close is time bounded but it can take > relatively long time, so a worker thread can offload this work to the > listener. From 2.4.28 onward > > + the listener does not perform the lingering close anymore > but it offloads the job to the first worker available. > > We can probably join these two sentences (moreover both are quite > contradictory, the lingering close is really offloaded *by* the > listener *to* a worker. > This is my fault, I was convinced that the worker was delegating the lingering close to the listener entirely, not only when the connection timeout elapsed. This is why I wrote from the worker to the listener and not the other way around. > > So how about something like: > "The lingering close is time bounded but it can take relatively long > time, so it's offloaded to a worker thread (including the shutdown > hooks and real socket close), and from 2.4.28 onward this is also the > case when connections finally timeout (the listener thread never > handles connections besides waiting for and dispatching their > events)." > ? > Committed in trunk/2.4.x with a small variation (added a . to separate the two sentences). Thanks a lot for the explanation, sorry for the wrong docs :) Luca
