Re: svn commit: r916377 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES docs/manual/programs/rotatelogs.xml support/rotatelogs.c
Dredging up an change from last year:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 06:00:43PM -, poir...@apache.org wrote:
Author: poirier
Date: Thu Feb 25 18:00:42 2010
New Revision: 916377
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=916377view=rev
Log:
Add -L option to create a hard link to the current log file.
...
@@ -351,6 +354,20 @@
status-pfile_prev = NULL;
}
status-nMessCount = 0;
+if (config-linkfile) {
+apr_file_remove(config-linkfile, status-pfile);
+if (config-verbose) {
+fprintf(stderr,Linking %s to %s\n, status-filename,
config-linkfile);
+}
+rv = apr_file_link(status-filename, config-linkfile);
This snippet gets invoked even in the case where opening a new log file
fails, and the old one is truncated and re-used; it will then fail and
break the link, I think. -L is kind of redundant with the more general
-p mode just added - is it worth keeping?
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1137590
Regards, Joe
RE: svn commit: r916377 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES docs/manual/programs/rotatelogs.xml support/rotatelogs.c
-Original Message-
From: Joe Orton
Sent: Montag, 20. Juni 2011 12:44
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r916377 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk:
CHANGES docs/manual/programs/rotatelogs.xml support/rotatelogs.c
Dredging up an change from last year:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 06:00:43PM -, poir...@apache.org wrote:
Author: poirier
Date: Thu Feb 25 18:00:42 2010
New Revision: 916377
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=916377view=rev
Log:
Add -L option to create a hard link to the current log file.
...
@@ -351,6 +354,20 @@
status-pfile_prev = NULL;
}
status-nMessCount = 0;
+if (config-linkfile) {
+apr_file_remove(config-linkfile, status-pfile);
+if (config-verbose) {
+fprintf(stderr,Linking %s to %s\n,
status-filename, config-linkfile);
+}
+rv = apr_file_link(status-filename, config-linkfile);
This snippet gets invoked even in the case where opening a
new log file
fails, and the old one is truncated and re-used; it will then
fail and
break the link, I think. -L is kind of redundant with the
Why? Because status-filename is not pointing to the old filename?
more general
-p mode just added - is it worth keeping?
I think it is worth keeping for those people that only need the link.
Creating a post rotation script that does this seems to be a little
bit of overkill in this case.
Regards
Rüdiger
Dead assignment detected from commit 1137358
Hi,
We are using Sentry (a C/C++ static analysis tool) to analyze
httpd on a nightly basis. Sentry found that a dead assignment
was recently introduced in the commit r1137358.
This was in event.c:process_socket. The variable pt
was previously used lower in the function, but after the patch
above was applied it is now only used in a local if scope.
This is basically a code clean up patch.
Thanks,
Chris
--
Chris Wilson
http://vigilantsw.com/
Vigilant Software, LLC
Index: server/mpm/event/event.c
===
--- server/mpm/event/event.c (revision 1137629)
+++ server/mpm/event/event.c (working copy)
@@ -787,7 +787,6 @@
int my_thread_num)
{
conn_rec *c;
-listener_poll_type *pt;
long conn_id = ID_FROM_CHILD_THREAD(my_child_num, my_thread_num);
int rc;
ap_sb_handle_t *sbh;
@@ -795,6 +794,7 @@
ap_create_sb_handle(sbh, p, my_child_num, my_thread_num);
if (cs == NULL) { /* This is a new connection */
+listener_poll_type *pt;
cs = apr_pcalloc(p, sizeof(conn_state_t));
@@ -845,7 +845,6 @@
else {
c = cs-c;
c-sbh = sbh;
-pt = cs-pfd.client_data;
c-current_thread = thd;
}
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de wrote: Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads, not the number of clients. As with the MaxRequestsPerChild - MaxConnectionsPerChild rename, we would still accept the old name with a warning. Thoughts? +1. That's more accurate for sure, and more important when you loose the 1:1 thread:connection ratio. Greg
Re: svn commit: r916377 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk: CHANGES docs/manual/programs/rotatelogs.xml support/rotatelogs.c
On 20 Jun 2011, at 12:58 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: more general -p mode just added - is it worth keeping? I think it is worth keeping for those people that only need the link. Creating a post rotation script that does this seems to be a little bit of overkill in this case. +1. Regards, Graham --
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de mailto:s...@sfritsch.de wrote: Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads, not the number of clients. As with the MaxRequestsPerChild - MaxConnectionsPerChild rename, we would still accept the old name with a warning. Thoughts? +1. That's more accurate for sure, and more important when you loose the 1:1 thread:connection ratio. Can we call this MaxRequestWorkers, now that we have different sorts of workers living in the same process?
Re: Time for httpd 2.3.13...? And 2.4.0??
On Jun 19, 2011, at 1:55 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: On 18.06.2011 14:44, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Friday 17 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/17/2011 6:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Are we ready for the next beta release??? And Maybe Even The Next Release being GA?? 2.3.13 soon, I'll fix the mod_ldap load ordering quirk on Sunday and just do a bit more validation with apr trunk. I am currently working on limiting the parallel connections per process on MPM event (see STATUS). I would really like to have this in 2.3.13, but I hope I will be able to finish it until tomorrow. The Next Release? I'm not seeing enough activity on users@ and not even seeing current ASF infra updated enough to justify that ;-) But if 2.2.13 proves rock solid, maybe the subsequent release? +1 to 2.3.13 as beta. Then hopefully the next release can be GA. Agreed. Cool...
Module External Configuration
Hello, The module that I am writing has an external configuration file that it parses and loads into configuration when the server loads. Before every request it checks to see if the configuration file has been updated and if it has it reloads the configuration. The configuration should be shared over the entire server. The problem I am running into is that after the configuration file is updated the new configuration gets reloaded and stored in memory but after a little while, the configuration reverts back to it's previous version. I assume that this is because a new process was spawned to handle a new request and the updated memory didn't get carried over (even though the pointer address didn't change...) My question is this: What mechanism should I be using in order to store persistent, mutable, configuration data that is shared between every child process? Jason
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de mailto:s...@sfritsch.de wrote: Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads, not the number of clients. As with the MaxRequestsPerChild - MaxConnectionsPerChild rename, we would still accept the old name with a warning. Thoughts? +1. That's more accurate for sure, and more important when you loose the 1:1 thread:connection ratio. Can we call this MaxRequestWorkers, now that we have different sorts of workers living in the same process? Good point. Committed as r1137744
REMINDER: Participation Requested: Survey about Open-Source Software Development
Hi, Apologies for any inconvenience and thank you to those who have already completed the survey. We will keep the survey open for another couple of weeks. But, we do hope you will consider responding to the email request below (sent 2 weeks ago). Thanks, Dr. Jeffrey Carver Assistant Professor University of Alabama (v) 205-348-9829 (f) 205-348-0219 http://www.cs.ua.edu/~carver -Original Message- From: Jeffrey Carver [mailto:opensourcesur...@cs.ua.edu] Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 11:24 AM To: 'dev@httpd.apache.org' Subject: Participation Requested: Survey about Open-Source Software Development Hi, Drs. Jeffrey Carver, Rosanna Guadagno, Debra McCallum, and Mr. Amiangshu Bosu, University of Alabama, and Dr. Lorin Hochstein, University of Southern California, are conducting a survey of open-source software developers. This survey seeks to understand how developers on distributed, virtual teams, like open-source projects, interact with each other to accomplish their tasks. You must be at least 19 years of age to complete the survey. The survey should take approximately 15 minutes to complete. If you are actively participating as a developer, please consider completing our survey. Here is the link to the survey: http://goo.gl/HQnux We apologize for inconvenience and if you receive multiple copies of this email. This survey has been approved by The University of Alabama IRB board. Thanks, Dr. Jeffrey Carver Assistant Professor University of Alabama (v) 205-348-9829 (f) 205-348-0219 http://www.cs.ua.edu/~carver
Re: Module External Configuration
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:39:48 -0500 Jason Funk jasonlf...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, The module that I am writing has an external configuration file that it parses and loads into configuration when the server loads. Before every request it checks to see if the configuration file has been updated and if it has it reloads the configuration. The configuration should be shared over the entire server. The problem I am running into is that after the configuration file is updated the new configuration gets reloaded and stored in memory but after a little while, the configuration reverts back to it's previous version. I assume that this is because a new process was spawned to handle a new request and the updated memory didn't get carried over (even though the pointer address didn't change...) My question is this: What mechanism should I be using in order to store persistent, mutable, configuration data that is shared between every child process? Put the configuration data into shared memory. Create and load the shared memory in the post config hook. Map the shared memory and potentially reload it during the child init hook. You'll need to use appropriate locking if you decide to reload it. Details on the locking will depend on the data structure details. mike -- Mike Meyer m...@mired.org http://www.mired.org/ Independent Software developer/SCM consultant, email for more information. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
Re: Module External Configuration
In the mod-sflow implementation I have one thread responsible for reading in new configuration as it changes and writing it to a shared-memory area where the worker-processes/threads can pick it up whenever it changes. I don't know if that is the best way or not, but it's one data point for you. Source code is here: http://mod-sflow.googlecode.com Neil On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:39 AM, Jason Funk wrote: Hello, The module that I am writing has an external configuration file that it parses and loads into configuration when the server loads. Before every request it checks to see if the configuration file has been updated and if it has it reloads the configuration. The configuration should be shared over the entire server. The problem I am running into is that after the configuration file is updated the new configuration gets reloaded and stored in memory but after a little while, the configuration reverts back to it's previous version. I assume that this is because a new process was spawned to handle a new request and the updated memory didn't get carried over (even though the pointer address didn't change...) My question is this: What mechanism should I be using in order to store persistent, mutable, configuration data that is shared between every child process? Jason
Re: Module External Configuration
I have moved my configuration over to shared memory (following mod_shm_counter as an example) and it conceptually seems to be working. I am storing a struct in the memory and members that share it's memory (such as the last mod time of the configuration file) persist over multiple children. However, when I am loading the configuration file I have to allocate additional memory. This apparently doesn't get stored in the same shared memory as it isn't sticking around. How do I dynamically allocate new memory to the struct that lives in shared memory? Jason On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Neil McKee neil.mc...@inmon.com wrote: In the mod-sflow implementation I have one thread responsible for reading in new configuration as it changes and writing it to a shared-memory area where the worker-processes/threads can pick it up whenever it changes. I don't know if that is the best way or not, but it's one data point for you. Source code is here: http://mod-sflow.googlecode.com Neil On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:39 AM, Jason Funk wrote: Hello, The module that I am writing has an external configuration file that it parses and loads into configuration when the server loads. Before every request it checks to see if the configuration file has been updated and if it has it reloads the configuration. The configuration should be shared over the entire server. The problem I am running into is that after the configuration file is updated the new configuration gets reloaded and stored in memory but after a little while, the configuration reverts back to it's previous version. I assume that this is because a new process was spawned to handle a new request and the updated memory didn't get carried over (even though the pointer address didn't change...) My question is this: What mechanism should I be using in order to store persistent, mutable, configuration data that is shared between every child process? Jason
Re: Module External Configuration
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 22:46, Jason Funk jasonlf...@gmail.com wrote: I have moved my configuration over to shared memory (following mod_shm_counter as an example) and it conceptually seems to be working. I am storing a struct in the memory and members that share it's memory (such as the last mod time of the configuration file) persist over multiple children. However, when I am loading the configuration file I have to allocate additional memory. This apparently doesn't get stored in the same shared memory as it isn't sticking around. How do I dynamically allocate new memory to the struct that lives in shared memory? You cannot (portably), you'll have to reserve the extra space when you the allocate the shared memory.
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de mailto:s...@sfritsch.de wrote: Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads, not the number of clients. As with the MaxRequestsPerChild - MaxConnectionsPerChild rename, we would still accept the old name with a warning. Thoughts? +1. That's more accurate for sure, and more important when you loose the 1:1 thread:connection ratio. Can we call this MaxRequestWorkers, now that we have different sorts of workers living in the same process? Good point. Committed as r1137744 That kind of last-minute change is going to kill people trying to upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 with a shared config. We should make MaxRequestWorkers an alias for MaxClients in a released 2.2.x Roy
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote: On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de mailto:s...@sfritsch.de wrote: Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads, not the number of clients. As with the MaxRequestsPerChild - MaxConnectionsPerChild rename, we would still accept the old name with a warning. Thoughts? +1. That's more accurate for sure, and more important when you loose the 1:1 thread:connection ratio. Can we call this MaxRequestWorkers, now that we have different sorts of workers living in the same process? Good point. Committed as r1137744 That kind of last-minute change is going to kill people trying to upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 with a shared config. We should make MaxRequestWorkers an alias for MaxClients in a released 2.2.x I think you missed that MaxClients still works in 2.4 (albeit with a warning on startup). So I don't think it's such a big deal.
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote: On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de mailto:s...@sfritsch.de wrote: Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads, not the number of clients. As with the MaxRequestsPerChild - MaxConnectionsPerChild rename, we would still accept the old name with a warning. Thoughts? +1. That's more accurate for sure, and more important when you loose the 1:1 thread:connection ratio. Can we call this MaxRequestWorkers, now that we have different sorts of workers living in the same process? Good point. Committed as r1137744 That kind of last-minute change is going to kill people trying to upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 with a shared config. We should make MaxRequestWorkers an alias for MaxClients in a released 2.2.x I think you missed that MaxClients still works in 2.4 (albeit with a warning on startup). So I don't think it's such a big deal. Perhaps we should lower the severity from warning to info? Not every admin needs constant reminders while they are running 2.2 and 2.4 from a single config.
Re: Module External Configuration
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 22:46, Jason Funk jasonlf...@gmail.com wrote: I have moved my configuration over to shared memory (following mod_shm_counter as an example) and it conceptually seems to be working. I am storing a struct in the memory and members that share it's memory (such as the last mod time of the configuration file) persist over multiple children. However, when I am loading the configuration file I have to allocate additional memory. This apparently doesn't get stored in the same shared memory as it isn't sticking around. How do I dynamically allocate new memory to the struct that lives in shared memory? Try C++ and boost::interprocess::managed_shared_memory and boost::interprocess::allocator. Sorin Jason On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Neil McKee neil.mc...@inmon.com wrote: In the mod-sflow implementation I have one thread responsible for reading in new configuration as it changes and writing it to a shared-memory area where the worker-processes/threads can pick it up whenever it changes. I don't know if that is the best way or not, but it's one data point for you. Source code is here: http://mod-sflow.googlecode.com Neil On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:39 AM, Jason Funk wrote: Hello, The module that I am writing has an external configuration file that it parses and loads into configuration when the server loads. Before every request it checks to see if the configuration file has been updated and if it has it reloads the configuration. The configuration should be shared over the entire server. The problem I am running into is that after the configuration file is updated the new configuration gets reloaded and stored in memory but after a little while, the configuration reverts back to it's previous version. I assume that this is because a new process was spawned to handle a new request and the updated memory didn't get carried over (even though the pointer address didn't change...) My question is this: What mechanism should I be using in order to store persistent, mutable, configuration data that is shared between every child process? Jason
Re: Module External Configuration
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:10:12 -0400 Mike Meyer m...@mired.org wrote: I assume that this is because a new process was spawned to handle a new request and the updated memory didn't get carried over (even though the pointer address didn't change...) A new process may be spawned from time to time (though not directly to handle a new request unless you have a very non-standard MPM). You could check config data in a child_init hook. However, if you have this problem, it's probably not your only one. The data reverting suggests that your module's config may be held on the server/config pool. If that's being updated (and if the updates involve any allocation at all) it's a memory leak. Your module should create its own config pool at child_init. Then it can read its own config data immediately, and - crucially - whenever it re-reads the data it can first clean that pool to reclaim memory. Put the configuration data into shared memory. Create and load the shared memory in the post config hook. Map the shared memory and potentially reload it during the child init hook. You'll need to use appropriate locking if you decide to reload it. Details on the locking will depend on the data structure details. If you use shared memory, note that 2.3/2.4 have much better support for it than earlier versions, with mod_socache and mod_slotmem. However, this may not be the best thing to do. You need to weigh up the cost of maintaining a per-process copy of the config data against that of using shared memory. Both are valid solutions. Also, do you want the overhead of a stat() every request to see if anything has changed, or could it work on a time basis, so it only performs a stat() if a certain time has elapsed since the last time? -- Nick Kew Available for work, contract or permanent. http://www.webthing.com/~nick/cv.html
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On 6/20/2011 4:48 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote: On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: That kind of last-minute change is going to kill people trying to upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 with a shared config. We should make MaxRequestWorkers an alias for MaxClients in a released 2.2.x I think you missed that MaxClients still works in 2.4 (albeit with a warning on startup). So I don't think it's such a big deal. Perhaps we should lower the severity from warning to info? Not every admin needs constant reminders while they are running 2.2 and 2.4 from a single config. +1... warning seems a bit dire for the circumstances. -- -- Daniel Ruggeri
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On Tuesday 21 June 2011, Daniel Ruggeri wrote: On 6/20/2011 4:48 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote: On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: That kind of last-minute change is going to kill people trying to upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 with a shared config. We should make MaxRequestWorkers an alias for MaxClients in a released 2.2.x I think you missed that MaxClients still works in 2.4 (albeit with a warning on startup). So I don't think it's such a big deal. Perhaps we should lower the severity from warning to info? Not every admin needs constant reminders while they are running 2.2 and 2.4 from a single config. +1... warning seems a bit dire for the circumstances. Sounds reasonable. r1137813
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On Jun 20, 2011, at 2:48 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote: On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de mailto:s...@sfritsch.de wrote: Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads, not the number of clients. As with the MaxRequestsPerChild - MaxConnectionsPerChild rename, we would still accept the old name with a warning. Thoughts? +1. That's more accurate for sure, and more important when you loose the 1:1 thread:connection ratio. Can we call this MaxRequestWorkers, now that we have different sorts of workers living in the same process? Good point. Committed as r1137744 That kind of last-minute change is going to kill people trying to upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 with a shared config. We should make MaxRequestWorkers an alias for MaxClients in a released 2.2.x I think you missed that MaxClients still works in 2.4 (albeit with a warning on startup). So I don't think it's such a big deal. Perhaps we should lower the severity from warning to info? Not every admin needs constant reminders while they are running 2.2 and 2.4 from a single config. My point wasn't the warning, actually, but rather the fact that a config that uses MaxRequestWorkers (instead of MaxClients) will abort an instance of httpd 2.2.x. Hence, a person upgrading to 2.4.x will get tripped up if they try to do so incrementally with shared config files across many web servers, unless they happen to notice that this change is merely cosmetic and they keep MaxClients instead. For a trivial improvement like this, we should make it easier on admins by backporting the alias to 2.2.x (even if we do not use it on 2.2.x). Roy
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On 6/20/2011 6:22 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: For a trivial improvement like this, we should make it easier on admins by backporting the alias to 2.2.x (even if we do not use it on 2.2.x). +1
Re: MPM-Event, renaming MaxClients, etc.
On 6/20/2011 6:22 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: My point wasn't the warning, actually, but rather the fact that a config that uses MaxRequestWorkers (instead of MaxClients) will abort an instance of httpd 2.2.x. Hence, a person upgrading to 2.4.x will get tripped up if they try to do so incrementally with shared config files across many web servers, unless they happen to notice that this change is merely cosmetic and they keep MaxClients instead. For a trivial improvement like this, we should make it easier on admins by backporting the alias to 2.2.x (even if we do not use it on 2.2.x). Roy +1 Sorry, I didn't catch that - good point. -- -- Daniel Ruggeri
