It was added in anticipation of the capability to be folded in, and done so "now" so that it would;t require any API changes.
Unless it's actually breaking something, I'd vote to simply keep it > On Apr 1, 2022, at 3:42 AM, jean-frederic clere <jfcl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 01/04/2022 08:47, jean-frederic clere wrote: >> On 31/03/2022 12:59, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 3/31/22 12:34 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Am 31.03.2022 um 11:55 schrieb Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org>: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 3/31/22 11:11 AM, Ruediger Pluem wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 3/30/22 4:42 PM, jfcl...@apache.org wrote: >>>>>>> Author: jfclere >>>>>>> Date: Wed Mar 30 14:42:14 2022 >>>>>>> New Revision: 1899390 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1899390&view=rev >>>>>>> Log: >>>>>>> Add WorkerBalancerGrowth. To allow creation of workers >>>>>>> to dynamically added balancers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: >>>>>>> httpd/httpd/trunk/CHANGES >>>>>>> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy.c >>>>>>> httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/proxy/mod_proxy.h >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Modified: httpd/httpd/trunk/CHANGES >>>>>>> URL: >>>>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/CHANGES?rev=1899390&r1=1899389&r2=1899390&view=diff >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- httpd/httpd/trunk/CHANGES [utf-8] (original) >>>>>>> +++ httpd/httpd/trunk/CHANGES [utf-8] Wed Mar 30 14:42:14 2022 >>>>>>> @@ -1,6 +1,10 @@ >>>>>>> -*- coding: utf-8 -*- >>>>>>> Changes with Apache 2.5.1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> + *) mod_proxy: Add WorkerBalancerGrowth to allow adding workers to >>>>>>> + balancer created dynamically or via "empty" <Proxy balancer://../> >>>>>>> + [Jean-Frederic Clere] >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not sure why this is needed. You can already do this via >>>>>> >>>>>> <Proxy balancer://somebalancer/ growth=10> >>>>>> </Proxy> >>>>> >>>>> Or >>>>> >>>>> <Proxy balancer://somebalancer/> >>>>> ProxySet growth=10 >>>>> </Proxy> >>>> >>>> FYI: Travis trunk also fails almost completely. Does not seem to accept a >>>> proxy configuration. >>> >>> This is because the if >>> >>> + if (!ap_strchr_c(conf->p, ':')) >>> + return apr_pstrcat(cmd->pool, thiscmd->name, >>> + "> arguments are not supported for non url.", >>> + NULL); >>> >>> should not return with an error, but just encapsulate the remainder of the >>> block. And I think the further >>> return apr_pstrcat are also wrong. >>> >>> But as said I am not sure about the purpose at all as you can already do, >>> what the patch should provide if I understand the patch >>> correctly. >> The purpose was to be able to add a balancer in the balancer-manager handle >> but that needs to pre-create the mutex and the slots for the workers. >> While looking to that I noted that: >> <Proxy balancer://somebalancer/> >> </Proxy> >> was doing nothing, the balancer is ignored, I should I revert the patch and >> add an error message if there is an empty entry like this one? > > There is also the BalancerGrowth directive that does nothing else than > creating a memory slot for balancers we never add/create in the > balancer-manager, I am tempted to remove it... > > Would it be better to add the missing logic? I have some pieces in > mod_proxy_cluster (https://github.com/modcluster/mod_proxy_cluster > <https://github.com/modcluster/mod_proxy_cluster> that could use the logic. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Rüdiger > > > -- > Cheers > > Jean-Frederic
