Re: [Bug 62308] New: Apache crashes after graceful restart with AH02599: slotmem (failed size check)

Most likely it is due to some assumptions in slotmem based on the underlying shm implementation, ie: SysV or Posix. I would be remiss is pointing out that here is yet another case where instead of a simple fix for a bug, we instead refactored a sh*t-ton of code and in the process, broke stuff.

Re: [Bug 62308] New: Apache crashes after graceful restart with AH02599: slotmem (failed size check)

A shm destroy cannot remove an open shm (any more than rm will remove an open file - at least on windows). In a graceful, you have a lingering child holding on to that resource. The short term fix would be to rename the offending shm resource on each attempted graceful restart. It may be

Re: svn commit: r1829430 - /httpd/httpd/patches/2.4.x/core-check_errorlog_dir_syslog.patch

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 7:17 AM, Jim Riggs wrote: > I didn't think of this before, but there is one edge case this would miss: if > someone (for whatever reason) wants a relative ErrorLog *file* named > `syslog*', for example `ErrorLog "syslog-httpd.log"' or `ErrorLog >

Re: [Bug 62308] New: Apache crashes after graceful restart with AH02599: slotmem (failed size check)

The current situation is, from what I can tell, worse and more pervasive than the original bug. > On Apr 18, 2018, at 10:01 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > This isn't fair Jim, the previous code didn't work as expected either, IMHO. > > Regarding PR 62277 for instance, it

Re: [Bug 62308] New: Apache crashes after graceful restart with AH02599: slotmem (failed size check)

Do you see a crash for the httpd process? Are you adding balancers only, BalancerMember(s), VirtualHost(s), all of these to reproduce? On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 6:37 PM, Exonetric wrote: > FWIW, I am seeing this too, but examining the code I could not see how. It > looks like

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

There are, IMO at least, 3 types of "regression" that we should be concerned about or that some people are concerned about: 1. New features: Undoubtedly, new features will likely have bugs and no by adding new features we could be adding bugs which could be seen as a regression.

Re: svn commit: r1829430 - /httpd/httpd/patches/2.4.x/core-check_errorlog_dir_syslog.patch

I didn't think of this before, but there is one edge case this would miss: if someone (for whatever reason) wants a relative ErrorLog *file* named `syslog*', for example `ErrorLog "syslog-httpd.log"' or `ErrorLog "syslog.log"'. It appears that this is already broken in server/log.c, though.

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:01 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > >> Am 17.04.2018 um 19:18 schrieb William A Rowe Jr : >> >>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:17 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: On 17 Apr 2018, at 6:08 PM, William A Rowe Jr

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: > > Since this thread was triggered by the mod_ssl config merging problems: I > think that was a case where a new feature was really nice, but to implement > it the needed changes where not not easy to understand in

"Most Popular Web Server?"

"Established in 1999, the all-volunteer Apache Software Foundation oversees more than 350 leading Open Source projects, including Apache HTTP Server --the world's most popular Web server software." How long will that last claim remain true? We can sum up the state of affairs from four

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

IMO, this boils down to 2 things: 1. nginx, particularly, does a LOT of promoting, marketing, PR, etc... We don't. They get to promote their FUD all the time and remain pretty much unchallenged. 2. They don't seem to have issues in understanding that new features, enhancements

Expanding httpd adoption internationally

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > 1. nginx, particularly, does a LOT of promoting, marketing, PR, etc... > We don't. They get to promote their FUD all the time and remain > pretty much unchallenged. I'd like to break out and break down

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

Am 18.04.2018 um 15:07 schrieb Jim Jagielski: There are, IMO at least, 3 types of "regression" that we should be concerned about or that some people are concerned about: 1. New features: Undoubtedly, new features will likely have bugs and no by adding new features we could be

/scheme/i sensitivity? (was: svn commit: r1829430 - /httpd/httpd/patches/2.4.x/core-check_errorlog_dir_syslog.patch)

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:36 AM, Jim Riggs wrote: > Fair enough. I'm fine standardizing either way. strn?cmp() is probably more > "correct". As it stands, though, the check in core is not actually checking > everything that log.c will handle. There are a number of places where

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

Am 18.04.2018 um 18:07 schrieb William A Rowe Jr: On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: Since this thread was triggered by the mod_ssl config merging problems: I think that was a case where a new feature was really nice, but to implement it the needed

Re: svn commit: r1829430 - /httpd/httpd/patches/2.4.x/core-check_errorlog_dir_syslog.patch

Fair enough. I'm fine standardizing either way. strn?cmp() is probably more "correct". As it stands, though, the check in core is not actually checking everything that log.c will handle. > On 18 Apr 2018, at 10:15, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > IMO, this boils down to 2 things: > > 1. nginx, particularly, does a LOT of promoting, marketing, PR, etc... > We don't. They get to promote their FUD all the time and remain > pretty much unchallenged.

Re: Expanding httpd adoption internationally

> On 18 Apr 2018, at 17:55, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > So I'll start with this; Erm, would you like to cite a source for that claim? I confess it’s not one I’ve seen. I don’t follow either nginx marketing nor any fan club they might have. If what you refer to is the

Re: [Bug 62308] New: Apache crashes after graceful restart with AH02599: slotmem (failed size check)

This isn't fair Jim, the previous code didn't work as expected either, IMHO. Regarding PR 62277 for instance, it worked because it attach()ed SHMs of unrelated balancers instead of creating new ones (this was the paper over SysV vs Posix, not the actual code which I think shows the real/potential

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

Le 18/04/2018 à 21:00, Luca Toscano a écrit : Before joining the httpd project as contributor I struggled to find good technical sources about how the httpd internals work, especially when it comes to important bits like mpm-event and how its architecture can be compared with other products.

Re: Expanding httpd adoption internationally

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Nick Kew wrote: > >> I suspect the straightforward way to do this, in 2.6/3.0, will be to add an >> i18n table of the error log strings extracted from and indexed by those >> APLOGNO() entries. No match? Default English message. > > Please, not

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

> On 18 Apr 2018, at 17:29, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > > Many will always carry a deep fondness or appreciation for Apache > httpd; how much traffic it actually carries in future years is another > question entirely, and has everything to do with the questions we >

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

Le mercredi 18 avril 2018 à 11:41 +0200, Graham Leggett a écrit : > On 17 Apr 2018, at 7:17 PM, Alain Toussaint wrote: > > > > No > > > distribution (that I am aware of) ships something called Apache httpd > > > v2.4.29. > > > > At LFS (linux from scratch), we're the

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

My 2c! 2018-04-18 19:21 GMT+02:00 William A Rowe Jr : > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:46 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > IMO, this boils down to 2 things: > > > > 1. nginx, particularly, does a LOT of promoting, marketing, PR, etc... > > We don't. They

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

> On Apr 18, 2018, at 1:21 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > > There we go again. Why do you and Graham have to make this about > Bill vs. yourselves? I didn't.

Re: Expanding httpd adoption internationally

> I suspect the straightforward way to do this, in 2.6/3.0, will be to add an > i18n table of the error log strings extracted from and indexed by those > APLOGNO() entries. No match? Default English message. Please, not without an overhaul of APLOGNO to automate it a lot better! The time to

Re: Expanding httpd adoption internationally

I'm speaking of personal i18n experience as a Windows developer, and assigning support for Cyrillic-based languages in nginx that I've presumed exist (I've never researched the software but am familiar with the origins.) IIS/Windows long offered robust support to the multibyte character

Re: Expanding httpd adoption internationally

Le 18/04/2018 à 20:00, William A Rowe Jr a écrit : I'm speaking of personal i18n experience as a Windows developer, and assigning support for Cyrillic-based languages in nginx that I've presumed exist (I've never researched the software but am familiar with the origins.) [...] In short, we

Re: Expanding httpd adoption internationally

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:53 PM, Marion et Christophe JAILLET wrote: > Le 18/04/2018 à 20:00, William A Rowe Jr a écrit : >> >> Localizing our error messages alone would go a long ways to being >> friendly to non-english speaking administrators. If we don't want to

Re: svn commit: r1829430 - /httpd/httpd/patches/2.4.x/core-check_errorlog_dir_syslog.patch

Thanks a lot Jim! I like your code change and the extra checks, but I'd prefer to use strncmp if possible, also in log.c. Feel free to amend the patch, or I'll do it tomorrow (I forgot the entry in CHANGES too, your name should be on it :). Luca 2018-04-18 18:36 GMT+02:00 Jim Riggs

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:07 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> On Apr 18, 2018, at 1:21 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: >> >> There we go again. Why do you and Graham have to make this about >> Bill vs. yourselves? > > I didn't. It's a challenge to read this

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

On 17 Apr 2018, at 7:17 PM, Alain Toussaint wrote: >> No >> distribution (that I am aware of) ships something called Apache httpd >> v2.4.29. > > At LFS (linux from scratch), we're the exception confirming the rule of > shipping v2.4.29 with the > single patch of defining a

Re: Current trunk does not build on Win

Thanks! Bill, Building fine with r1829381 and initial tests looking ok. On Tuesday 17/04/2018 at 19:57, William A Rowe Jr wrote: On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Steffen wrote: I like to continue building/testing trunk. Is there a fix coming ? I guess not from

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

> Am 17.04.2018 um 19:18 schrieb William A Rowe Jr : > >> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Graham Leggett wrote: >> >> The distributions have been doing this nigh on two decades - the stability >> of a given software baseline which will not suddenly

Re: Expanding httpd adoption internationally - POC

Le 18/04/2018 à 22:12, William A Rowe Jr a écrit : On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Nick Kew wrote: I suspect the straightforward way to do this, in 2.6/3.0, will be to add an i18n table of the error log strings extracted from and indexed by those APLOGNO() entries. No match?

Re: So... when should we do 2.4.34? [WAS: Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)]

Daniel, would you find it feasible to make a 2.4 release every first Tuesday of the month? Other projects have excellent experiences with such release timings. I‘d expect this would let us focus on the changes („one more week until release“), take off pressure („we can do it in the next

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

On 4/18/2018 11:46 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > IMO, this boils down to 2 things: > > 1. nginx, particularly, does a LOT of promoting, marketing, PR, etc... > We don't. They get to promote their FUD all the time and remain > pretty much unchallenged. Speaking from experience at $dayjob,

So... when should we do 2.4.34? [WAS: Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)]

On 4/18/2018 10:58 AM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: >> The release cycle is hours, to the benefit of all interested. Be it a >> blocking bug fixed or a nice feature implemented. These are mostly people >> who do it for fun. Some even run large server clusters, so a „hobbyist“ >> label does not

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

Just. Stop. On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 5:29 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > > On Apr 18, 2018, at 2:32 PM, William A Rowe Jr > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:07 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> > >>> On Apr 18, 2018, at 1:21 PM,

Re: "Most Popular Web Server?"

> On Apr 18, 2018, at 2:32 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:07 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> On Apr 18, 2018, at 1:21 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote: >>> >>> There we go again. Why do you and Graham have

Re: Revisit Versioning? (Was: 2.4.3x regression w/SSL vhost configs)

On 4/18/2018 1:34 PM, Alain Toussaint wrote: >> As an aside - httpd has a —enable-layout option in configure that defines >> where things should go. >> If you patch the following file how you want it and submit it to us, we can >> formally support LFS >> out the box and you can remove the need

Re: [Bug 62308] New: Apache crashes after graceful restart with AH02599: slotmem (failed size check)

Does the root of this issue go back to this backport? Author: minfrin Date: Tue Feb 13 22:11:47 2018 New Revision: 1824180 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1824180=rev Log: mod_proxy_balancer,mod_slotmem_shm: Rework SHM reuse/deletion to not depend on the number of restarts (non-Unix