Mike Looijmans wrote:
Oh and if we are refactoring the tests, I want a make tests rule. I'm
tired of doing: ./configure; make; sudo make install; make tests; DOH!
cd test; python test.py. :)
Make that make check (like autotools), to not confuse old-skool
autoconfers like myself.
That
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
As Jim pointed out a while back, we need to get going on mod_python 3.3
before I fill up JIRA with another page of bug reports or suggestions.
I think you already *have* filled another page since I made that comment. ;)
That said, how do we want to proceed on this? Do
The Apache Software Foundation and The Apache HTTP Server Project are
pleased to announce the 3.2.7 release of mod_python. Mod_python 3.2.7
is considered a stable release, suitable for production use.
Mod_python is an Apache HTTP Server module that embeds the Python
language interpreter within
Hi,
I'm currently reading the feature section from mod_perl. Initially, I
was trying to find information about how they cope with
multithreading, multiple interpreter instantiation and code reloading,
but I stumbled upon this :
http://perl.apache.org/start/tips/config.html
Now, I can't stand
http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/user/intro/overview.html#Threads_Support
Regards,
Nicolas
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MODPYTHON-29?page=comments#action_12366267
]
Graham Dumpleton commented on MODPYTHON-29:
---
Whether one allows this means making some sort of policy decision about what
the purpose of mod_python.publisher is.
Jim Gallacher wrote ..
Jorey Bump wrote:
Jim Gallacher wrote:
This is how I would set priorities:
Try and assign most of the issues to someone. This is a bit of PR
spin, but I think it looks bad when there are a large number of open
issues with no assignee. To the public it
It seems that bu dfdefault Perl is not thread safe, and that they have
to jump through all those hoops to ensure thread safety. There is no
real lesson for mod_python, I just wanted to know how they solved this
rather difficult problem.
Not instantiating one interpreter per name per thread and
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
i am trying to use mod_proxy_balancer with a backend that is in turn
using name-based virtual hosts.
it seems that mod_proxy_balancer doesn't honor ProxyPreserveHost (both
2.2.0 and trunk), and does not send the Host: header to the backend.
would there be interest
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Graham Leggett
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
i am trying to use mod_proxy_balancer with a backend that is in turn
using name-based virtual hosts.
it seems that mod_proxy_balancer doesn't honor
ProxyPreserveHost (both
2.2.0 and trunk), and
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Gregor J. Rothfuss
hi,
i am trying to use mod_proxy_balancer with a backend that is in turn
using name-based virtual hosts.
it seems that mod_proxy_balancer doesn't honor
ProxyPreserveHost (both
2.2.0 and trunk), and does not send the
Plüm wrote:
After a first quick view in the code on trunk I cannot see a problem there.
Can you please post your config here, such that we can rule out a config
problem?
let me know if this snip is enough:
NameVirtualHost *:8080
ProxyRequests Off
ProxyPreserveHost On
Proxy
On Feb 7, 2006, at 3:50 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
During my work on PR 38403 (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/
show_bug.cgi?id=38403) I noticed that
Balancermembers appear twice in the worker list. First they get
created by ap_proxy_add_worker
in add_member of mod_proxy.c and afterwards
I can't recreate that here... Can you provide more info?
On Feb 13, 2006, at 12:43 AM, Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
hi,
i am trying to use mod_proxy_balancer with a backend that is in
turn using name-based virtual hosts.
it seems that mod_proxy_balancer doesn't honor ProxyPreserveHost
we are pleased to announce a new release candidate for the Apache-Test
distribution.
http://people.apache.org/~geoff/Apache-Test-1.28-dev.tar.gz
please give it a whirl and report back success or failure.
prior to the 1.26 release it was discovered that Apache-Test didn't play
nice with boxes
Mark Galbreath wrote:
I'm drawing a blank
for those following only dev@httpd.apache.org, and thus may be unaware of
what Apache-Test is, here's the deal...
Apache-Test
http://perl.apache.org/Apache-Test/
is the engine that drives the perl-framework
Jim Gallacher wrote:
This is how I would set priorities:
Try and assign most of the issues to someone. This is a bit of PR spin,
but I think it looks bad when there are a large number of open issues
with no assignee. To the public it may look like the project is not
being actively
On 2/10/2006 at 5:58:43 pm, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joshua Slive wrote:
On 1/26/06, Ian Holsman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Joshua:
httpd.conf.in has the new structure
httpd-std.conf (the one I was looking at) didn't ;(
Hmmm... httpd-std.conf doesn't exist
On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 08:57:14PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: rpluem
Date: Sat Feb 11 12:57:12 2006
New Revision: 377053
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=377053view=rev
Log:
* Do not remove the connection headers from r-headers_in. They are needed
by the http output
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:26:39AM -0700, Brad Nicholes wrote:
Yes, we do need to make this change. With the provider based
rearchitecting of authentication in httpd 2.2, this left authorization
in an unpredictable state especially when using multiple authorization
types. You were never
This looks like a big change, and my only concern is
that the behavior changes, although it appears that
we don't know why the current behavior is the
way it is...
Anyway:
On Feb 12, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
The real problem is that we actually *close* our connection to the
On Feb 13, 2006, at 11:22 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
This, I think provides a clue: I'm guessing we are trying
to optimize the client-Apache link, at the expense of
opening/closing sockets to the backend, or wasting
those sockets. If we had a nice connection pool, then
it would be different...
Jorey Bump wrote:
Jim Gallacher wrote:
This is how I would set priorities:
Try and assign most of the issues to someone. This is a bit of PR
spin, but I think it looks bad when there are a large number of open
issues with no assignee. To the public it may look like the project is
not
ProxyPassReverse / balancer://tiles_live_cluster/
This looks wrong, shouldn't this be http://reverse.proxy.host/ ?
Joost
Jim Jagielski wrote:
there is no guarantee that the next
kept-alive connection will go to the same backend;
as such, keeping it open is wasteful and re-using
it is downright wrong.
Why? Why would we care which backend a request goes to, in general.
And, do we not want to use keepalives as
On Feb 13, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Brian Akins wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
there is no guarantee that the next
kept-alive connection will go to the same backend;
as such, keeping it open is wasteful and re-using
it is downright wrong.
Why? Why would we care which backend a request goes to, in
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Currently I work on PR 38602
(http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38602).
First of all the reporter is correct that we do not sent the
Connection: Keep-Alive
header on our HTTP/1.1 keep-alive connections to the backend.
But this is only the small part of the
On Feb 13, 2006, at 1:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Currently I work on PR 38602 (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/
show_bug.cgi?id=38602).
First of all the reporter is correct that we do not sent the
Connection: Keep-Alive
header on our HTTP/1.1 keep-alive
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Let's assume that you have Apache setup as a proxy and furthermore
it's configured so that /html goes to foo1 and /images goes
to /foo2.
A request comes in for /html/index.htm, and gets proxied to
foo1, as it should; the connection is kept-alive, and a
request for
Brian Akins wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Let's assume that you have Apache setup as a proxy and furthermore
it's configured so that /html goes to foo1 and /images goes
to /foo2.
A request comes in for /html/index.htm, and gets proxied to
foo1, as it should; the connection is
Nicolas Lehuen wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently reading the feature section from mod_perl. Initially, I
was trying to find information about how they cope with
multithreading, multiple interpreter instantiation and code reloading,
but I stumbled upon this :
On 2/13/2006 at 8:39:41 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:26:39AM -0700, Brad Nicholes wrote:
Yes, we do need to make this change. With the provider based
rearchitecting of authentication in httpd 2.2, this left
authorization
in an
* Plüm, Rüdiger, VIS [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-02-06 09:29]:
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Alan Gutierrez
The proposed solution is to poll for chunks using
non-blocking I/O. When the socket returns EAGAIN, the 8K
buffer is flushed, and the socket is read with blocking
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Yep, and that's why I think we close the connection each time;
umm, I thought the balancer would try to keep the connection open to
backends? A single client may wind up talking to multiple backend pools
over the course of a connection (/css - A, /images - B, etc.).
On 02/13/2006 07:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
The real problem is that we've never paid attention to the backend server.
If speaking to a backend http/1.0 server, we can try connection: keep-alive
if the server pays attention to it. That header is invalid for
On 02/13/2006 09:12 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Brian Akins wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Let's assume that you have Apache setup as a proxy and furthermore
it's configured so that /html goes to foo1 and /images goes
to /foo2.
A request comes in for /html/index.htm, and gets proxied to
foo1, as
On 02/13/2006 06:31 PM, Joost de Heer wrote:
ProxyPassReverse / balancer://tiles_live_cluster/
This looks wrong, shouldn't this be http://reverse.proxy.host/ ?
Yes, this also looks wrong to me. I think he needs a separate ProxyPassReverse
line for *each* of the backend servers he
Brian Akins wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Yep, and that's why I think we close the connection each time;
umm, I thought the balancer would try to keep the connection open to
backends? A single client may wind up talking to multiple backend pools
over the course of a connection (/css -
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
What do you mean by real connection pooling? We actually have connection
pooling
via the apr reslist. The patch ensures that we return this connection to the
pool
such that it can be used by other clients that use this worker.
That's what I mean by real... it's
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006, Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
Hi,
* Miroslav Maiksnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-02-09 07:05:48]:
I'm trying debug mod_spnego in gdb, but it looks apache2 does not load debug
info for module (I can't see source). What is the proper way to debug apache
modules using debuger?
I
Nicolas Lehuen wrote ..
Hi,
I'm currently reading the feature section from mod_perl. Initially, I
was trying to find information about how they cope with
multithreading, multiple interpreter instantiation and code reloading,
but I stumbled upon this :
Hi --
This may be an old topic of conversation, in which case I apologize.
I Googled and searched marc.theaimslist.com and Apache Bugzilla but
didn't see anything, so here I am with a question.
In brief, on Linux, when doing an ungraceful stop of httpd, any
worker threads that are
To clarify, are you sure its not using EPoll instead of Poll?
Chris Darroch wrote:
Hi --
This may be an old topic of conversation, in which case I apologize.
I Googled and searched marc.theaimslist.com and Apache Bugzilla but
didn't see anything, so here I am with a question.
In brief,
On 2/13/2006 at 8:39:41 am, in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 08:26:39AM -0700, Brad Nicholes wrote:
Yes, we do need to make this change. With the provider based
rearchitecting of authentication in httpd 2.2, this left
authorization
in an
Anyone? This is killing me.
The only thing I've been able to figure out is this:
my $error = $apacheRequest-body_status();
if ( $error eq 'Exceeds configured maximum limit' )
{
$self-RESULT_FINAL__general( undef , 'Your file is too big.' );
On 02/13/2006 04:37 PM, Joe Orton wrote:
On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 08:57:14PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This change (I think) is triggering the bad pool ancestry abort() in the
tables code: the proxy tests in the test suite are all dumping core in
APR_POOL_DEBUG builds since
On 02/13/2006 05:22 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
This looks like a big change, and my only concern is
This is why I discuss it first, before I commit it :-)
that the behavior changes, although it appears that
we don't know why the current behavior is the
way it is...
Then we should either
Jonathan Vanasco [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anyone? This is killing me.
The only thing I've been able to figure out is this:
my $error = $apacheRequest-body_status();
if ( $error eq 'Exceeds configured maximum limit' )
That looks ok to me for now; but what we really need to do
Paul:
This may be an old topic of conversation, in which case I apologize.
I Googled and searched marc.theaimslist.com and Apache Bugzilla but
didn't see anything, so here I am with a question.
In brief, on Linux, when doing an ungraceful stop of httpd, any
worker threads that are
49 matches
Mail list logo
