I put the docs guys on CC as there might be (hopefully :-)) someone over there
who is interested in cleaning up the documentation mess regarding this.
On 06/16/2007 02:17 AM, Jess Holle wrote:
Ah, that would make sense -- but that's not what the docs say as you
point out :-)
--
Jess Holle
Currently one can specify timeout on one's BalancerMember (e.g. with
mod_proxy_ajp).
Does this serve as both a connection and request timeout? If so, in the
worst case I can use it to be both and thus set it for the latter
(knowing it is ridiculous for the former).
I read the Re:
As I understand mod_proxy_* and APR code, the BalancerManager timeout
will set a timeout for individual read and write attempts to backend
connections.
So it neither correlates to an idle timeout on the connection (see ttl
and smax) neither to a request timeout in the sense of a limit to the
Hmmm
The documentation says:
timeout |Timeout| Connection timeout in seconds. If not set the
Apache will wait until the free connection is available. This
directive is used for limiting the number of connections to the
backend server together with |max| parameter.
Okay, I'm still wondering about the future behavior based on the Re:
ProxyTimeout does not work as documented thread (which is why I'm
bothering the dev mailing list, since the thread is from there), but
after some testing the current (2.2.4) behavior is clearly that:
1. If no timeout is
I think you need to make a distinction between the timeout *attribute*
on a BalancerMember and the one on a balancer itself. At least the code
does the distinction (2.2.4).
a) timeout for a Balancermember (aka worker): timeout waiting for a read
or write on an existing backend connection to
Ah, that would make sense -- but that's not what the docs say as you
point out :-)
--
Jess Holle
Rainer Jung wrote:
I think you need to make a distinction between the timeout *attribute*
on a BalancerMember and the one on a balancer itself. At least the
code does the distinction (2.2.4).
