Ruediger Pluem wrote:
-for (i = 0; i arr-nelts; i++) {
-const char *err = set_balancer_param(conf, cmd-pool, balancer,
elts[i].key,
- elts[i].val);
+else {
+if (params-nelts 0
+
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Georg von Zezschwitz
Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. Mai 2007 10:05
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer
You declare a balancer:
Proxy balancer://mycloud
BalancerMember ajp://192.168.1.1:5001
On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 21:05 +0200, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 05/07/2007 05:56 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
I think we could use a simple two use case situation.
To be able to backport that to the 2.2 branch I propose
a following patch.
It adds additional struct member sticky_path that
On 04/06/2007 01:13 PM, Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
If we state that the evaluation takes place in the occurence of
stickysession attributes
and suggest
stickysession=Cookie:JSESSIONID stickysession=Path:;jsessionid to
the user
it will perform faster in
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 04/06/2007 01:13 PM, Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
attached is the patch for trunk with documentation Co.
Could anybody review it commit?
Many thanks for sending the patch and my apologies that reviewing it took
that long. Please find my
On 05/07/2007 05:56 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
I think we could use a simple two use case situation.
To be able to backport that to the 2.2 branch I propose
a following patch.
It adds additional struct member sticky_path that is
set to the sticky so if someone has in the config
...
Jim Jagielski wrote:
If we state that the evaluation takes place in the occurence of
stickysession attributes
and suggest
stickysession=Cookie:JSESSIONID stickysession=Path:;jsessionid to
the user
it will perform faster in average.
As I promised to write the patch, I would do it the
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Mladen Turk
Gesendet: Dienstag, 3. April 2007 17:25
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer
stickysession=JSESSIONID stickysession=;jsessionid
stickysession=MYSESSION
would mean
Mladen Turk wrote:
...
or perhaps a different notation ...
stickysession=Cookie:JSESSIONID stickysession=Env:MYSESSION
I like that much more - these flags like [C] rather raise questions
like
can I add multiple of them?.
What about this?:
stickysession
The attribute can occur multiple times
Plüm wrote:
1. You want to change sticky in struct proxy_balancer from
const char *sticky
to something like
const char *sticky[MAX_ENTRIES]
Yes, although MAX_ENTRIES would be 3 for now
(cookie, path and env)
Why is FOO stored in balancer-sticky-[2]? Is it because
Thanks for the clarifications.
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Mladen Turk
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2007 13:36
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer
Plüm wrote:
1. You want to change sticky in struct
On Apr 4, 2007, at 8:46 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
But this means that we break the ABI here. If struct proxy_balancer
is part
of a public API (I am not sure about this) this would require a
major bump
and would prevent backporting.
Since the whole idea of loadable lb method
Plüm wrote:
Yes, although MAX_ENTRIES would be 3 for now
(cookie, path and env)
But this means that we break the ABI here. If struct proxy_balancer is part
of a public API (I am not sure about this) this would require a major bump
and would prevent backporting.
The other solution is to
On Apr 4, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Plüm wrote:
Yes, although MAX_ENTRIES would be 3 for now
(cookie, path and env)
But this means that we break the ABI here. If struct
proxy_balancer is part
of a public API (I am not sure about this) this would require a
major bump
and
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2007 16:16
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer
On Apr 4, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Plüm wrote:
Yes, although MAX_ENTRIES
Plüm wrote:
Plus does it make sense to split the sticky string everytime we search
for a route? From my performance feeling this split should be done during
configuration time.
We can use the NUL separated double NUL terminated string.
Then a part is start + strlen(start)
Regards,
Mladen.
On Apr 4, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
Hmmm... I like this idea. Not sure about the use of '/'
as the delim (simply because of its other meanings) but
that's secondary.
Of course, we can't use strtok, since sticky is a const
char and we can't be shoving NULLs in there :)
On Apr 4, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
Jim Jagielski schrieb:
Rüdiger's point is that we would be doing the scanning
for each and every request, which is wasteful since they
aren't changing. Even in the above the strlen() is
counting chars that don't change between requests.
Mladen Turk schrieb:
...
or perhaps a different notation ...
stickysession=Cookie:JSESSIONID stickysession=Env:MYSESSION
I like that much more - these flags like [C] rather raise questions like
can I add multiple of them?.
What about this?:
stickysession
The attribute can occur multiple times
Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
As I (with Rüdigers help :-) ) found out, there is already a bug report
to my problem:
#41897 describes the problem that the case-sensitivity of the
stickysession-Parameter
does not comply to the Java Servlet Spec (Cookie: JSESSIONID, url
based session
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 08:30 +0200, Mladen Turk wrote:
Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
As I (with Rüdigers help :-) ) found out, there is already a bug report
to my problem:
#41897 describes the problem that the case-sensitivity of the
stickysession-Parameter
does not comply to the
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jean-Frederic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 3. April 2007 11:32
An: dev@httpd.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Bug 41897 / Session-Stickiness with mod_proxy_balancer
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 08:30 +0200, Mladen Turk wrote:
Georg von
Plüm wrote:
IMHO adding config parameters is no blocker for a backport.
I was under different perception.
It is probably more easy to add balancer-stickyurl =
jsessionid when
balancer-sticky is JSESSIONID and NULL otherwise.
Or in get_path_param() test for jsessionid when
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 15:06 +0200, Mladen Turk wrote:
Plüm wrote:
IMHO adding config parameters is no blocker for a backport.
I was under different perception.
It is probably more easy to add balancer-stickyurl =
jsessionid when
balancer-sticky is JSESSIONID and NULL
Jean-Frederic wrote:
We could do that then by using existing directive and decide
during configure time.
For example:
stickysession=JSESSIONID [C] stickysession=;jsessionid [P]
Does that mean that stickysession=JSESSIONID will work as it does now?
Yes.
I don't think we need Case
Mladen Turk schrieb:
Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
.. #41897 describes the problem that the case-sensitivity of the
stickysession-Parameter
does not comply to the Java Servlet Spec (Cookie: JSESSIONID, url
based session
management ;jsessionid).
This is not the breakage of the Servlet-Spec.
Hi,
As I (with Rüdigers help :-) ) found out, there is already a bug report
to my problem:
#41897 describes the problem that the case-sensitivity of the
stickysession-Parameter
does not comply to the Java Servlet Spec (Cookie: JSESSIONID, url
based session
management ;jsessionid).
To solve
The message I posted earlier (in march) contains a patch to address this issue.
Mathias.
On 4/2/07, Georg von Zezschwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
As I (with Rüdigers help :-) ) found out, there is already a bug report
to my problem:
#41897 describes the problem that the case-sensitivity
28 matches
Mail list logo
