William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Have any of you had a chance to play with the change from using <Directory proxy:foo> syntax to using <Proxy foo> syntax? Any comments from the first few days of it's existence? Anyone playing with benchmarking 2.0.24 vs. cvs head on req/sec?
I was benchmarking cvs head with different pool allocation algorithms. (and threaded/prefork) http://webperf.org/a2/v25
I'm playing with the proxies and mod-include at the moment
the only thing 'funny' I'm noticing is that the map_to_storage hook isn't getting called for a sub-request.. this may be my code I just noticed that 10 minutes ago, I'm still investigating it.
Bill
----- Original Message ----- From: "Eli Marmor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 3:00 PM
Subject: [Fwd: 2.0.26?]
Please look at the forwarded message from new-httpd.
Looks as a good time to roll a tar with Apache/proxy/APR, doesn't it?
It's too early to know if this tag will become a beta, but it will be surely more stable than the current beta (2.0.16 or 2.0.18, I don't remember...).
-- Eli Marmor [EMAIL PROTECTED] CTO, Founder Netmask (El-Mar) Internet Technologies Ltd. __________________________________________________________ Tel.: +972-9-766-1020 8 Yad-Harutzim St. Fax.: +972-9-766-1314 P.O.B. 7004 Mobile: +972-50-23-7338 Kfar-Saba 44641, Israel
