On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:39, Andrew Godziuk and...@cloudaccess.net wrote:
What I want to achieve is injecting new vhosts without Apache restart.
Of course I'm aware that the changes would fully take effect after all
workers have recycled, but for me - it's still better than a restart.
Andrew,
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Ben Noordhuis i...@bnoordhuis.nl wrote:
Andrew, wouldn't you be better off with something like
mod_vhost_alias, as-is or as leitmotiv? Propagating configuration
changes to all workers is rather difficult, especially with pre-fork
MPMs.
Unfortunately, I need
On 1 Jun 2010, at 10:39, Andrew Godziuk wrote:
I'm wondering if it's possible for an Apache module to change global
config structures.
Basically, no, not without a restart. Though there are some aspects of
configuration you can change on the fly.
What I want to achieve is injecting new
On 6/1/2010 3:30 AM, Bryan McQuade wrote:
I had a conversation with a well known hosting provider recently and
they told me they use the default Apache configuration for their
shared hosting service. When I asked if they provide gzip as an option
for their users, they said no, since it was not
On 01.06.2010 07:19, Jerome Renard wrote:
In 2010, IMO there is no good reason to have gzip disabled by default.
Almost all websites enable it. There are a handful of prominent
websites that do not. I've had conversations with a few of these
sites. Most of them have not turned it on because they
On 01 Jun 2010, at 2:30 AM, Bryan McQuade wrote:
I had a conversation with a well known hosting provider recently and
they told me they use the default Apache configuration for their
shared hosting service. When I asked if they provide gzip as an option
for their users, they said no, since it
Hi,
First of all, hi to the Apache developers, I'm new to this list - nice
to meet you all.
I'm wondering if it's possible for an Apache module to change global
config structures.
What I want to achieve is injecting new vhosts without Apache restart.
Of course I'm aware that the changes would
Situation: worker or event MPM. Process shutdown due to:
- MaxRequestsPerChild
- MaxSpareThreads
- Graceful stop or graceful restart
When an httpd child process shuts down due to the above conditions, it
doesn't respect existing Keep-Alive connections. When the previous
response signalled
- Graham Leggett minf...@sharp.fm wrote:
The very definition of tuned means tailored for your local setup.
It's actually quite hard to get this thought accross. I think we should
put it in a reboot of the performance ``optimization'' documentation.
The default httpd configuration
Typically, you
would want to front a mod_deflate with an HTTP cache, such as mod_cache (or
equivalent). Here mod_cache only makes sense if you have the disk space to
support it, and there is no real one-size-fits-all cache setup.
This said, our default config is 15 years old, and attempts to
Geez, Eric. No wonder people don't want to contribute to httpd, when they
run into an attitude like yours. That dismissiveness makes me embarressed
for our community.
There is zero reason for us to avoid putting deflate into the default
configuration.
It is also very arguable that we should
From: Greg SteinSent: Dienstag, 1. Juni 2010 14:40
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: Fast by default
Geez, Eric. No wonder people don't want to contribute to httpd, when
they run into an attitude like
I repeatedly inserted millisecond or microsecond timestamps as well as
PID and thread ID information into the ErrorLog when trying to diagnose
problems, most often in combination with additional log lines.
Due to the increased load and capability of systems and increasing
amount of
Hi folks,
here's a patch to mod_disk_cache.h to set the defaults as recommended by:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/mod_disk_cache.html
This is quite a complex patch, and I'm not sure it'll pass any reviews.
Index: mod_disk_cache.h
- Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com wrote:
here's a patch to mod_disk_cache.h to set the defaults as
recommended by:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/mod/mod_disk_cache.html
I might be crazy, but I can't spot the recommendation you refer to in
the doc.
No, you're not crazy. I
In a filter module I'm writing, it's possible for the first pass
through the output filter to end up calling:
ap_pass_brigade(f-next, an_empty_brigade)
If mod_deflate's output filter appears later in the output filter
chain, bad things happen:
1. On the first trip through the output filter
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Brian Pane brianp...@gmail.com wrote:
In a filter module I'm writing, it's possible for the first pass
through the output filter to end up calling:
ap_pass_brigade(f-next, an_empty_brigade)
If mod_deflate's output filter appears later in the output filter
The guide to writing output filters says:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/developer/output-filters.html#invocation
An output filter should never pass an empty brigade down the filter
chain. But, for good defensive programming, filters should be prepared
to accept an empty brigade, and do
IIUC, the vary: user-agent to accomodate Netscape 4 is a pain for
caches because obviously they can only vary on the entire user-agent.
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_deflate.html
Is it time to move this aspect of the snippet into a separate note or
some historical trivia section, to
-Original Message-
From: Bryan McQuade
Sent: Dienstag, 1. Juni 2010 16:54
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Cc: mdste...@google.com
Subject: Re: mod_deflate handling of empty initial brigade
The guide to writing output filters says:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group
ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com wrote:
The guide to writing output filters says:
https://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/developer/output-filters.h
tml#invocation
An output filter should never pass an empty brigade down the filter
chain. But,
Deprecating obsolete libraries is a good thing, especially if there is
a compelling replacement.
I think this goes hand in hand with what operating system versions we
will be targeting for 2.4. We should inventory which versions of the
libraries are offered on each and then make the
On 1 Jun 2010, at 15:53, Bryan McQuade wrote:
According to this, mod_deflate should not pass the empty brigade
along, and your module also should not be passing and empty brigade to
mod_deflate.
Eric, others, should we submit a patch to mod_deflate to change its
behavior to be consistent
On 6/1/2010 7:05 AM, Eric Covener wrote:
Typically, you
would want to front a mod_deflate with an HTTP cache, such as mod_cache (or
equivalent). Here mod_cache only makes sense if you have the disk space to
support it, and there is no real one-size-fits-all cache setup.
This said, our
Considering that 2.3/trunk is back to limbo-land, I'd like
to propose that we be more aggressive is backporting some
items. Even if under experimental, it would be nice if slotmem
and socache were backported. I also like the refactoring of
the providers for proxy in trunk as compared to 2.2, but
On 25.05.2010 15:09, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Joe Orton
Sent: Dienstag, 25. Mai 2010 14:46
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: RFC: drop support for OpenSSL 1.0 in trunk/2.3?
I'd like to drop support for versions of OpenSSL older than
1.0 in the
trunk
I went ahead and created a bug entry/patch to make the (trivial)
change to mod_deflate to make it conform to the Guide to writing
output filters:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49369
Brian, does this patch to mod_deflate fix your problem?
Nick, does this change seem
Yeah, it should only Vary on Accept-encoding (already does). It's still not
perfect, but at least it doesn't blow up proxies too much.
The question to people with statistics - are there any other issues with
gzip/proxy configurations?
Sergey
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Eric
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@apache.org wrote:
Considering that 2.3/trunk is back to limbo-land, I'd like
to propose that we be more aggressive is backporting some
items. Even if under experimental, it would be nice if slotmem
and socache were backported. I also like the
Don't forget the ongoing issue that if you ONLY vary on 'Accept-Encoding'
then almost ALL browsers will then refuse to cache a response entity LOCALLY
and the pain factor moves directly to the Proxy/Content Server(s).
If you vary on 'User-Agent' ( No longer reasonable because of the abuse
of
On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:44:41 -0400
toki...@aol.com wrote:
Don't forget the ongoing issue that if you ONLY vary on 'Accept-Encoding'
then almost ALL browsers will then refuse to cache a response entity LOCALLY
Really? That sounds bizarre! Do you have a reference for it?
--
Nick Kew
There is zero reason for us to avoid putting deflate into the default
configuration.
Sorry. There ARE (good) reasons to avoid doing so.
I'm the one who wrote the FIRST mod_gzip module for Apache 1.x series
so you would think I'd be a strong advocate of 'auto-enablement' by default,
but I am
web sites are loading too slow for pipes and web-server power that we have.
The key phrase there is 'that WE have'.
YOU need to tune YOUR configs to match what YOU have.
ANYONE who uses Apache can/should/must do that.
That's how that works.
The discussion at this moment is what 'default'
Sergey wrote...
That's new to me that browsers don't cache stuff that has Vary only on
Accept-Encoding - can you post some statistics or describe the test you ran?
Test results and statistics...
Apache DEV forum...
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 16:25, Sergey Chernyshev
sergey.chernys...@gmail.com wrote:
This sounds scary! How do large companies enable gzip then? How many hoops
do they jump through? sounds like those hoops are in thousands!
And I don't understand how one company's setup would be different from
Let me preface ALL the remarks below with TWO statements...
1. I haven't done any research on these HTTP based Client/Server compression
topics in quite some time. It is all, essentially, 'ancient history' for me
but it still amazes me that some of the issues are, so many years later,
still
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 10:28 AM, Matthew Steele mdste...@google.com wrote:
I went ahead and created a bug entry/patch to make the (trivial)
change to mod_deflate to make it conform to the Guide to writing
output filters:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49369
Brian, does
All,
I was once offered money to provide a high-performance Apache configuration
file for a website. When I pointed out that I would need to come in, analyze
their app and its performance, and then iteratively tune the config
accordingly, I was given to understand that this was not
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:04 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
[...]
Plus deflate may provide no benefit, and degrade performance, if the CPU
utilization is a greater concern than bandwidth utilization.
The CPU utilization is an interesting topic for me because I've been
working
39 matches
Mail list logo
