I want to get some configuration variables from httpd.conf and .htaccess for
mod_auth_digest:
static const command_rec digest_cmds[] =
{
AP_INIT_TAKE1(AuthName, set_realm, NULL, OR_AUTHCFG,
The authentication realm (e.g. \Members Only\)),
AP_INIT_ITERATE(AuthDigestProvider,
Looks like I need to use:
AllowOverride AuthConfig
Is this right? Where do I put this?
Margaret Michele Waldman
Sovereign Sites L.L.C.
Website Development
646-861-3375
Rule your domain ...
-Original Message-
From: Michele Waldman [mailto:mmwald...@nyc.rr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05,
I never could get it to pull from both httpd.conf and .htaccess at the same
time.
But, I'd rather put everything in .htaccess anyway. My client would never
figure out how to change httpd.conf and restart apache.
Oh, well. Good enough.
Michele
-Original Message-
From: Joe Lewis
wr...@apache.org wrote:
Author: wrowe
Date: Tue May 5 06:23:29 2009
New Revision: 771579
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=771579view=rev
Log:
MPM's are now dynamically loadable; so must mod_watchdog be.
The only module with an excuse now is mod_so which implements
LoadModule
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker, why
not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer we see
that mod_proxy initialise one copy and mod_proxy_balancer the other, it
is working
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: jean-frederic clere
Gesendet: Dienstag, 5. Mai 2009 10:46
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: mod_proxy / mod_proxy_balancer
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
As you say the logic is weird and IMHO this needs serious
reconstruction.
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker,
why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer we
see that mod_proxy
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker,
why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer we
see that
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 4:12 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.netwrote:
wr...@apache.org wrote:
Author: wrowe
Date: Tue May 5 06:23:29 2009
New Revision: 771579
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=771579view=rev
Log:
MPM's are now dynamically loadable; so must
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker,
why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and
On May 5, 2009, at 9:32 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the
worker, why not just the address?
If you looks to
On May 5, 2009, at 9:32 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the
worker, why not just the address?
If you looks to
Mladen Turk wrote:
jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the worker,
why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init()
I'd like to work on a mod_ftp release to go along
with the 2.2.12 release... I think baselining mod_ftp
for only 2.2.x makes sense, and I'd really like to get a
release out.
What's the status? I've done some prelim tests and they
look good.
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker-id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers need
a different handling if we want to have a shared information area
for them.
The thing is that
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like to work on a mod_ftp release to go along
with the 2.2.12 release... I think baselining mod_ftp
for only 2.2.x makes sense, and I'd really like to get a
release out.
What's the status? I've done some prelim tests and they
look good.
See STATUS?
Jeff Trawick wrote:
but LoadModule mod_watchdog falls after other modules. Now I don't
recall
precisely how Jeff worked out the MPM hooks, and am too tired to
work it out
just at this moment, but would renaming this config3.m4 work out this
ordering issue?
Why
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker-id and the scoreboard associated logic
moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers need a
different handling if we want to have a shared information area for them.
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:58 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
wr...@rowe-clan.netwrote:
Jeff Trawick wrote:
but LoadModule mod_watchdog falls after other modules. Now I don't
recall
precisely how Jeff worked out the MPM hooks, and am too tired to
work it out
just at this
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker-id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers
need a different handling
Jeff Trawick wrote:
If it exports any raw functions (instead of using external hook or
optional function apis), I think the code should be fixed.
I'm not even clear that folks issues with the mod_watchdog API were
ever addressed, or if this should be set aside from the next release
while some
I've been using it as fallback when I can't conenct to mine via webdav.
So far it's working ok, even vhosts but thats still a bit tricky but
works non-the-less.
I'd love to see it included for a 2.2.x but 2.4.x would be nice aswel.
~Jorge
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 5:56 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker-id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in the reset() when using a balancer, those workers
need a different handling
On May 5, 2009, at 1:18 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker-id and the scoreboard associated
logic moved in
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:56 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I'd like to work on a mod_ftp release to go along
with the 2.2.12 release... I think baselining mod_ftp
for only 2.2.x makes sense, and I'd really like to get a
release out.
What's the
Just a quick note, it looks like fedora 10 (probably other flavors)
ship a borked lua package, see
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499238
No apparent problem with mod_lua once liblua-5.1.so is correctly
bound to -lm.
j...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Tue May 5 18:18:10 2009
New Revision: 771953
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/mod_ftp/trunk/docs/manual/mod/mod_ftp.html.en?rev=771953r1=771952r2=771953view=diff
==
On May 5, 2009, at 2:31 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
j...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jim
Date: Tue May 5 18:18:10 2009
New Revision: 771953
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/mod_ftp/trunk/docs/manual/mod/mod_ftp.html.en?rev=771953r1=771952r2=771953view=diff
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 1:18 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I am trying to get the worker-id and the scoreboard
On 05/05/2009 07:15 PM, jfcl...@apache.org wrote:
Author: jfclere
Date: Tue May 5 17:15:48 2009
New Revision: 771940
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=771940view=rev
Log:
Change the order of mod_proxy and mod_proxy_balancer child_init().
Change the balancer workers area to the
On May 5, 2009, at 3:02 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 1:18 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I
On May 5, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
@@ -1471,13 +1471,13 @@
PROXY_DECLARE(void)
ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer(apr_pool_t *pool, proxy_balancer
*balancer,
-proxy_worker *worker)
+proxy_worker **worker)
IMHO
On May 5, 2009, at 9:32 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the
worker, why not just the address?
If you looks to
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 3:02 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 1:18 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 12:07 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 11:13 AM,
On 05/05/2009 10:41 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
The next question is how do we call the ageing?
- Via a thread that calls it after an elapsed time.
More accurate, but more complex.
- When there is a request and the actual time is greater than the time
Less accurate, but less complex.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
@@ -1471,13 +1471,13 @@
PROXY_DECLARE(void)
ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer(apr_pool_t *pool, proxy_balancer
*balancer,
-proxy_worker *worker)
+
On May 5, 2009, at 4:41 PM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
I think we need it for few reasons:
- When a worker is idle the information about its load is irrelevant.
Agreed... but I'm not sure how age affects this :)
- Being able to calculate throughput and load balance using that
On May 5, 2009, at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 4:45 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
Hi,
There are 2 weird things in the logic.
- In ap_proxy_add_worker_to_balancer() we make a copy of the
worker, why not just the address?
If you looks to child_init() in mod_proxy and
38 matches
Mail list logo
