Grisha,
Looks good and the links work.
Were you planning on making an announcement (on the mod_python list at
least) regarding your ApacheCon talk as well?
Jim
Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy wrote:
Let me know if you see anything wrong in the text below, I'll send it
out later today or
Hi,
I recently installed mod_python 3.2b5 on Apache 2.0.54. I am running with
problems if httpd slave process segfaults or is killed. In this case,
master process restart the max number of processes/threads. We are running
Apache with the MPM worker (on Tru64 platform).
This behaviour
Graham,
Sorry for the ambiguity. With worker MPM, the max number of process is the
max number of threads divided by the number of thread per process. My
config is :
# worker MPM
# StartServers: initial number of server processes to start
# MaxClients: maximum number of simultaneous client
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 10:38:26AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 12:43:09PM +, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
Yep, but it's how the user gets around that that's the real problem. If
a user has apr 1.1 installed in /usr, the only way to get httpd to
configure is to
On 11/3/05, Olaf van der Spek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe Orton wrote:
All versions need unclean shutdown at least, not sure about keepalive. If
you
have new data to provide on this front that's great and very welcome, please
send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] bugzilla is not a discussion
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 10:44:05AM +, Nick Kew wrote:
FWIW, www.apache.org has been running 2.1.9 since early November.
I've been running it exclusively live since 2.1.9 (and previously 2.1.8
quietly on a high port). I expect Colm should be able to report on it
running in an
Paul Querna wrote:
FWIW, www.apache.org has been running 2.1.9 since early November.
A large site that I know about has been serving several million hits/day
with 2.1.9. New proxy stuff rocks!
I have a change freeze so I cannot test 2.1.10 in production until
next week.
--
Brian Akins
On Nov 20, 2005, at 1:51 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 08:48:20AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
-1 for GA. We should have 2.1.10 as beta for at least a week,
possibly
2, note it as a RC to the general public and the, after significant
feedback from the user community
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
t having 2.1.10 be a GA.
Remember that we released 2.1.9 (and several others before then)
publicly with very little legitimate negative feedback. Plus, 2.1.10
has only small code changes from 2.1.9.
Okay, I'm lazy. Where's the change log?
--
Brian Akins
Lead
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I briefly tried httpd-2.1.10 today and still see this.
(Same httpd.conf, only changed ServerRoot to
/usr/local/apache2-2.1.10/)
kind regards
Hansjörg
Hansjoerg Pehofer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
I experienced Apache-2.1.7 (/w WorkerMPM
Having a thread block to page in data that isn't currently in the cache
is fine, as long as other threads are able to handle all the other
requests. What I would really like to see is support for zero copy
sends without using sendfile(). Right now I believe that apache is
calling sendfile()
+1 for beta status on NetWare. This will probably also be a +1 for GA
as well as long as nothing significant turns up over the next several
days of testing.
Brad
On 11/19/2005 at 6:17:42 pm, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tarballs available from:
On 11/21/05, Brad Nicholes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for beta status on NetWare. This will probably also be a +1 for GA
as well as long as nothing significant turns up over the next several
days of testing.
Will there be (beta) Windows binaries available before it become GA?
I wouldn't
Let me know if you see anything wrong in the text below, I'll send it out
later today or tomorrow. The download page has been updated to show 3.2.5b
already.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Gregory (Grisha) Trubetskoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: announce@httpd.apache.org, [EMAIL
On 11/21/2005 at 9:51:31 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/21/05, Brad Nicholes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for beta status on NetWare. This will probably also be a +1 for
GA
as well as long as nothing significant turns up over the next
several
days of
Ji all,
I am trying to configure a apache 2.1.9-beta reverse proxy with mod_proxy
(or mod_rewrite [P]) and i encounter a strange problem, i think it is a
bug...
I encounter the problem when i do load tests with 10 simultaneous
users(with LoadRunner application). When i do single test request (a
Brad Nicholes wrote:
Good point and this might be one reason why we need a RC status
before going GA. I know that on at least 2 platforms (windows,
netware), there would be a lot more testing and feedback from the
general user community if binaries were available. Personally, I don't
Thanks for the report: You said that you tested against
2.1.10-HEAD right?
On Nov 21, 2005, at 10:25 AM, Hansjoerg Pehofer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I briefly tried httpd-2.1.10 today and still see this.
(Same httpd.conf, only changed ServerRoot to
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On 11/3/05, Olaf van der Spek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe Orton wrote:
All versions need unclean shutdown at least, not sure about keepalive. If you
have new data to provide on this front that's great and very welcome, please
send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] bugzilla
Around line 865 in 'modules\aaa\mod_authnz_ldap.c', there is the following
sequence :
=
/* Set all the values, or at least some sane defaults */
if (sec-host) {
char *p = apr_palloc(cmd-pool, strlen(sec-host) +
Around line 61 in function ap_queue_info_create, in 'server/mpm/fdqueue.c'
the following sequence can cleaned-up :
===
qi = apr_palloc(pool, sizeof(*qi));
memset(qi, 0, sizeof(*qi));
===
by using a 'apr_pcalloc' :
On 11/21/2005 06:52 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Thanks for the report: You said that you tested against
2.1.10-HEAD right?
On Nov 21, 2005, at 10:25 AM, Hansjoerg Pehofer wrote:
Hi,
I briefly tried httpd-2.1.10 today and still see this.
(Same httpd.conf, only changed ServerRoot to
On 11/21/05, Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On 11/3/05, Olaf van der Spek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe Orton wrote:
All versions need unclean shutdown at least, not sure about keepalive.
If you
have new data to provide on this front that's great and
+1 I compiled 2.1.10 on windows with Visual C++ 2005.
No issues to report all working fine for more then a day.
Steffen
http://www.apachelounge.com
ps.
I was not able to compile mod_dbd and Mod_authn_dbd.
not included in the dsw and dsp files.
When I compile manual I get:
1Compiling...
William A. Rowe, Jr. writes:
Brad Nicholes wrote:
Good point and this might be one reason why we need a RC status
before going GA. I know that on at least 2 platforms (windows,
netware), there would be a lot more testing and feedback from the
general user community if binaries were
On Monday 21 November 2005 22:10, Steffen wrote:
+1 I compiled 2.1.10 on windows with Visual C++ 2005.
No issues to report all working fine for more then a day.
Steffen
http://www.apachelounge.com
ps.
I was not able to compile mod_dbd and Mod_authn_dbd.
not included in the dsw and dsp
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On 11/21/05, Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Olaf van der Spek wrote:
On 11/3/05, Olaf van der Spek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe Orton wrote:
All versions need unclean shutdown at least, not sure about keepalive. If you
have new data to provide on this
Michel Jouvin wrote ..
Hi,
I recently installed mod_python 3.2b5 on Apache 2.0.54. I am running with
problems if httpd slave process segfaults or is killed. In this case,
master process restart the max number of processes/threads. We are running
Apache with the MPM worker (on Tru64
On 11/22/05, Joshua Slive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is that needed?
Wouldn't changing the default configuration not affect existing sites
as those keep their existing configuration?
Yes. But I still have not seen a very clear statement that this
configuration is no longer needed in
29 matches
Mail list logo
