On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Justin Erenkrantzjus...@erenkrantz.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Paul Quernap...@querna.org wrote:
I am looking for an alternative that doesn't expose all this crazyness
of when to free, destruct, or lock things. The best idea I can come
up with
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Mladen Turkmt...@apache.org wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Can't sleep, so finally writing this email I've been meaning to write
for about 7 months now :D
Pools don't help, but don't really make it worse, and are good enough
for the actual cleanup part -- the
Hi,
Now with the changes that have been made in the mod_proxy logic it is
possible to create workers dynamically in balancer modules (I need that
for mod_cluster and I have been experimenting with
modules/proxy/balancers/mod_lbmethod_heartbeat.c).
set_worker_param is needed to create a
Paul Querna wrote:
This deals with removing an event from the pollset, but what about an
event that had already fired, as I gave in the original example of a
timeout event firing the same time a socket close event happened?
In that case I suppose the only solution is to make the operations
Hi,
Sorry, I didn't know that was in wrong forum. What's the best list to write
this doubt ??
I want to modify MPM Worker (worker.c) to develop some scheduling
algorithms.
A first scheduling algorithm would be implement priority. Two queues
(worker_queue1 and worker_queue2) of sockets where
2009/7/7 ricardo13 ricardoogra...@gmail.com:
Hi,
Sorry, I didn't know that was in wrong forum. What's the best list to write
this doubt ??
You may well be on the right list, but right now it isn't too clear
that you really need to be modifying the actual MPM code.
I want to modify MPM
ricardo13 wrote:
I want to modify MPM Worker (worker.c) to develop some scheduling
algorithms.
A first scheduling algorithm would be implement priority. Two queues
(worker_queue1 and worker_queue2) of sockets where threads (workers) get
all requests from worker_queue1 first, afterget all
Graham Dumpleton-2 wrote:
2009/7/7 ricardo13 ricardoogra...@gmail.com:
Hi,
Sorry, I didn't know that was in wrong forum. What's the best list to
write
this doubt ??
You may well be on the right list, but right now it isn't too clear
that you really need to be modifying the actual
2009/7/7 ricardo13 ricardoogra...@gmail.com:
Graham Dumpleton-2 wrote:
2009/7/7 ricardo13 ricardoogra...@gmail.com:
Hi,
Sorry, I didn't know that was in wrong forum. What's the best list to
write
this doubt ??
You may well be on the right list, but right now it isn't too clear
that
Mladen Turk-3 wrote:
ricardo13 wrote:
I want to modify MPM Worker (worker.c) to develop some scheduling
algorithms.
A first scheduling algorithm would be implement priority. Two queues
(worker_queue1 and worker_queue2) of sockets where threads (workers)
get
all requests from
Graham Dumpleton-2 wrote:
2009/7/7 ricardo13 ricardoogra...@gmail.com:
Graham Dumpleton-2 wrote:
2009/7/7 ricardo13 ricardoogra...@gmail.com:
Hi,
Sorry, I didn't know that was in wrong forum. What's the best list to
write
this doubt ??
You may well be on the right list, but
Mladen Turk-3 wrote:
ricardo13 wrote:
I want to modify MPM Worker (worker.c) to develop some scheduling
algorithms.
A first scheduling algorithm would be implement priority. Two queues
(worker_queue1 and worker_queue2) of sockets where threads (workers)
get
all requests from
Paul Querna wrote:
Can't sleep, so finally writing this email I've been meaning to write
for about 7 months now :D
One of the challenges in the Simple MPM, and to a smaller degree in
the Event MPM, is how to manage memory allocation, destruction, and
thread safety.
A 'simple' example:
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Graham Leggettminf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
I think it is possible to write a complete server that deals with all
these intricacies and gets everything just 'right', but as soon as you
introduce 3rd party module writers, no matter how 'smart' we
Paul Querna wrote:
Nah, 90% of what is done in moduels today should be out of process aka
in FastCGI or another method, but out of process. (regardless of
MPM)
You're just moving the problem from one server to another, the problem
remains unsolved. Whether the code runs within httpd
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Graham Leggettminf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Nah, 90% of what is done in moduels today should be out of process aka
in FastCGI or another method, but out of process. (regardless of
MPM)
You're just moving the problem from one server to
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Graham Leggettminf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Yes, but in a separate process it has fault isolation.. and we can
restart it when it fails, neither of which are true for modules using
the in-process API directly -- look at the reliability of QMail,
Paul Querna wrote:
Yes, but in a separate process it has fault isolation.. and we can
restart it when it fails, neither of which are true for modules using
the in-process API directly -- look at the reliability of QMail, or
the newer architecture of Google's Chrome, they are both great
Paul Querna wrote:
It breaks the 1:1: connection mapping to thread (or process) model
which is critical to low memory footprint, with thousands of
connections, maybe I'm just insane, but all of the servers taking
market share, like lighttpd, nginx, etc, all use this model.
It also prevents
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Paul Querna p...@querna.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Graham Leggettminf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Paul Querna wrote:
Nah, 90% of what is done in moduels today should be out of process aka
in FastCGI or another method, but out of process.
This is how I envisioned the async stuff working.
-Async event thread is used only for input/output of httpd to/from network*
-After we read the headers, we pass the request/connection to the worker
threads. Each request is sticky to a thread. Request stuff may block,
etc, so this thread pool
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Akins, Brianbrian.ak...@turner.com wrote:
This is how I envisioned the async stuff working.
-Async event thread is used only for input/output of httpd to/from network*
-After we read the headers, we pass the request/connection to the worker
threads. Each
Akins, Brian wrote:
This is how I envisioned the async stuff working.
-Async event thread is used only for input/output of httpd to/from network*
-After we read the headers, we pass the request/connection to the worker
threads. Each request is sticky to a thread. Request stuff may block,
On 7/7/09 1:02 PM, Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
Ideally any async implementation should be 100% async end to end. I
don't believe that its necessary though for a single request to be
handled by more than one thread.
True. However, what about things that may be process intensive.
traw...@apache.org writes:
Author: trawick
Date: Mon Jul 6 12:03:20 2009
New Revision: 791454
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=791454view=rev
Log:
SECURITY: CVE-2009-1891 (cve.mitre.org)
Fix a potential Denial-of-Service attack against mod_deflate or other
modules, by forcing the
On 07/06/2009 11:14 PM, jfcl...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jfclere
Date: Mon Jul 6 21:14:21 2009
New Revision: 791617
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=791617view=rev
Log:
Add use slotmem. Directive HeartbeatMaxServers 10 to activate the logic.
Otherwise it uses the file logic to
On 07/07/2009 07:02 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
Ideally any async implementation should be 100% async end to end. I
don't believe that its necessary though for a single request to be
handled by more than one thread.
I agree. I see no reason for multiple threads working on the same request at
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 16:01 +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
As is httpd prefork :)
Yeah, definitely my favourite MPM :-)
As far as I understand this, the deal is that we need to have a complete
request before we start processing it. Otherwise, we can get stuck and
one of our precious resources is
All,
I'm now trying for hours to get 4 symbols of mod_watchdog into an export
list :(
these 4 symbols are: ap_hook_watchdog_exit, ap_hook_watchdog_init,
ap_hook_watchdog_need, ap_hook_watchdog_step.
The problem seems to be that in the pre-preocessed file the function
macro expands to one line with
Hi,
I compiled httpd-2.2.11 with ./configure --with-included-apr
--enable-ssl --disable-cgi --disable-cgid --with-mpm=prefork
--enable-status. HTTP requests seem to be processed fine from a users
point of view, but I get many segfaults in my apache log when I
seriously increase the workload. Here
30 matches
Mail list logo
