Dredging up an change from last year:
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 06:00:43PM -, poir...@apache.org wrote:
Author: poirier
Date: Thu Feb 25 18:00:42 2010
New Revision: 916377
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=916377view=rev
Log:
Add -L option to create a hard link to the current log
-Original Message-
From: Joe Orton
Sent: Montag, 20. Juni 2011 12:44
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r916377 - in /httpd/httpd/trunk:
CHANGES docs/manual/programs/rotatelogs.xml support/rotatelogs.c
Dredging up an change from last year:
On Thu, Feb 25,
Hi,
We are using Sentry (a C/C++ static analysis tool) to analyze
httpd on a nightly basis. Sentry found that a dead assignment
was recently introduced in the commit r1137358.
This was in event.c:process_socket. The variable pt
was previously used lower in the function, but after the patch
above
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de wrote:
Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be
renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads,
not the number of clients. As with the MaxRequestsPerChild -
MaxConnectionsPerChild
On 20 Jun 2011, at 12:58 PM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote:
more general
-p mode just added - is it worth keeping?
I think it is worth keeping for those people that only need the link.
Creating a post rotation script that does this seems to be a little
bit of overkill in this case.
+1.
On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de
mailto:s...@sfritsch.de
wrote:
Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should be
renamed to MaxWorkers, because it limits the number of worker threads,
not
On Jun 19, 2011, at 1:55 AM, Rainer Jung wrote:
On 18.06.2011 14:44, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Friday 17 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/17/2011 6:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Are we ready for the next beta release???
And Maybe Even The Next Release being GA??
2.3.13 soon,
Hello,
The module that I am writing has an external configuration file that it
parses and loads into configuration when the server loads. Before every
request it checks to see if the configuration file has been updated and if
it has it reloads the configuration. The configuration should be shared
On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de
mailto:s...@sfritsch.de
wrote:
Speaking about config options, I think that MaxClients should
be renamed to MaxWorkers,
Hi,
Apologies for any inconvenience and thank you to those who have already
completed the survey. We will keep the survey open for another couple of
weeks. But, we do hope you will consider responding to the email request
below (sent 2 weeks ago).
Thanks,
Dr. Jeffrey Carver
Assistant Professor
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:39:48 -0500
Jason Funk jasonlf...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
The module that I am writing has an external configuration file that it
parses and loads into configuration when the server loads. Before every
request it checks to see if the configuration file has been
In the mod-sflow implementation I have one thread responsible for reading in
new configuration as it changes and writing it to a shared-memory area where
the worker-processes/threads can pick it up whenever it changes. I don't know
if that is the best way or not, but it's one data point for
I have moved my configuration over to shared memory (following
mod_shm_counter as an example) and it conceptually seems to be working. I am
storing a struct in the memory and members that share it's memory (such as
the last mod time of the configuration file) persist over multiple children.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 22:46, Jason Funk jasonlf...@gmail.com wrote:
I have moved my configuration over to shared memory (following
mod_shm_counter as an example) and it conceptually seems to be working. I am
storing a struct in the memory and members that share it's memory (such as
the last
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de
mailto:s...@sfritsch.de
wrote:
Speaking about config options, I think that
On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch s...@sfritsch.de
mailto:s...@sfritsch.de
wrote:
On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Stefan Fritsch
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 22:46, Jason Funk jasonlf...@gmail.com wrote:
I have moved my configuration over to shared memory (following
mod_shm_counter as an example) and it conceptually seems to be working. I am
storing a struct in the memory and members that share it's memory (such as
the last
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:10:12 -0400
Mike Meyer m...@mired.org wrote:
I assume that this is because a new process was spawned to
handle a new request and the updated memory didn't get carried over (even
though the pointer address didn't change...)
A new process may be spawned from time to
On 6/20/2011 4:48 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
That kind of last-minute change is going to kill people trying to
upgrade from 2.2 to 2.4 with
On Tuesday 21 June 2011, Daniel Ruggeri wrote:
On 6/20/2011 4:48 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
That kind of last-minute change is going
On Jun 20, 2011, at 2:48 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/20/2011 4:36 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 20 June 2011, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Jun 20, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
On Monday 20 June 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/20/2011 9:07 AM, Greg Ames wrote:
On
On 6/20/2011 6:22 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
For a trivial improvement like this, we should make it easier on admins
by backporting the alias to 2.2.x (even if we do not use it on 2.2.x).
+1
On 6/20/2011 6:22 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
My point wasn't the warning, actually, but rather the fact that a config
that uses MaxRequestWorkers (instead of MaxClients) will abort an instance
of httpd 2.2.x. Hence, a person upgrading to 2.4.x will get tripped up
if they try to do so
24 matches
Mail list logo
