On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 15:44, Andrej van der Zee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for your reply! > >> >> Giving it a second thought, the problem looks complicated. Such >> filter-based counters would count the traffic of _one_ apache process. >> When you increment the counter, you have to protect it from concurrent >> access by other threads running in the same apache child process. >> Then, before the apache child process exits, you need to add the >> counter to a global counter shared among apache child processes (which >> has to be protected against race conditions as well). It's really >> hairy. Don't do it in apache. >> > > I forgot to mention, but I need the number of packets / bytes per HTTP > request and log it to a database with other information. So I guess > that would take case of all the hairy stuff. I think I will give it a > go as you recommend with an input and output filter that only counts > the bytes and just passes on the data, unless somebody comes with a > better idea (what about the content-length for example, can I trust > this?). I understood from your email that the headers are counted with > it (I never wrote a filter before) and that's exactly what I need.
No, the Content-Length doesn't include the size of the headers. While I was typing the message, Dave Ingram's message arrived. I think the solution he proposes is much better. Sorin Sorin
