On 2/1/22 12:53 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 12:57 PM Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 1/31/22 10:10 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
>>>
>>> Are we now finished with improving the PCRE2 capabilities with regards to
>>> allocation / performance?
>>>
>>> I see the following revisions that would need to be backported on top of
>>> the above patch:
>>>
>>> 1897240
>>> 1897241
>>> 1897244
>>> 1897248
>>> 1897250
>>> 1897260
>>> 1897261
>>> 1897263
>>> 1897386
>>> 1897459
>>> 1897460
>>> 1897461
>>> 1897462
>>> 1897472
>>> 1897543
>>>
>>>
>>> Did I miss any?
>
> r1897242 :)
>
>>
>> Looking further into this I guess backporting
>>
>> 1612934
>> 1612940
>> 1613189
>>
>> makes sense as well (Add compiled and loaded PCRE version numbers to "httpd
>> -V" output and to mod_info page).
>>
>> Question is if this should be a separate backport or merged with this
>> backport. If it is a separate backport, we
>> have an order dependency between these backports.
>
> I have created https://github.com/apache/httpd/pull/289 with all of
> those, the first commit being the current backport proposal (once it's
> backported I can still rebase).
Thanks. I will have a look.
> The whole works for me, I'll +1 the current proposal first (even
> though I'd prefer that we build with pcre1 by default if both are
> available) and hopefully we can have the second series voted in the
> same release..
As I expect that the TLS approach will be available in most cases I am fine
with switching the default. We just should state
this clearly in the CHANGES entry. If someone experiences issues with PCRE2 he
can still switch back to PCRE.
Regards
Rüdiger
