You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> on 2013/02/05 23:44:43 UTC
Apache 2.4 adoption
I've found the following data summary very useful in terms of
drill-down capability;
http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.2/all
http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.4/all
while their breakdown/segmentation tabulations provide some
interesting data such as;
http://w3techs.com/technologies/breakdown/ws-apache/operating_system
The very limited 'free' tabulation remaining from SecuritySpace
seems to back up this assessment;
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/201301/servers.html
There seems to be a worthwhile discussion about the challenges
presented by 2.4 which have adversely affected its adoption,
during the ApacheCon Hackathon Mon 2/25 in Portland. I'd like
to set aside time about 11am for that discussion for anyone who
wants to participate.
Once we take away some good information from that roundtable,
it would be worthwhile to hold a BoF later in the week especially
for end users who are looking at or challenged by adopting 2.4.
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
On 07/02/2013 07:54, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
[snip]
> I also wonder if this would have been different if the httpd project
> had offered an rpm or apt-get packages, for example? It seems like
> there will always be a significant lag between a new major.minor
> release and seeing it injected into the major distributions.
>
This has been the case for a while, and kinda makes sense, I think. I
mean, would we build on the latest and greatest compilers, just because
they had big new shiny features?
Probably not. We like stability in time-tested compilers.
Same for many end-user sysadmins.
Issac
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On Wed, 6 Feb 2013 10:22:45 +0000 (GMT)
pfee@talk21.com wrote:
> How many Linux distros ship httpd 2.4?
>
> Fedora 18 is their first release to include httpd 2.4. Since Fedora
> is often an early adopter of new releases, I expect 2.4 hasn't
> trickled down to other distributions yet, e.g. RHEL, CentOS.
>
> It looks like 2.4 has only got as for as Debian experimental:
> http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=apache
>
> Ubuntu haven't adopted it yet:
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=apache
>
> Of course the next question could be why have distros not adopted
> 2.4, is it just a matter of time or are there other factors?
That is part of what I'd like to learn Monday if any active distro
or packaging people are at the ApacheCon Hackathon.
I also wonder if this would have been different if the httpd project
had offered an rpm or apt-get packages, for example? It seems like
there will always be a significant lag between a new major.minor
release and seeing it injected into the major distributions.
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 06 Feb 2013, at 12:22 PM, pfee@talk21.com wrote:
> How many Linux distros ship httpd 2.4?
>
> Fedora 18 is their first release to include httpd 2.4. Since Fedora is often an early adopter of new releases, I expect 2.4 hasn't trickled down to other distributions yet, e.g. RHEL, CentOS.
>
> It looks like 2.4 has only got as for as Debian experimental:
> http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=apache
>
> Ubuntu haven't adopted it yet: http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=apache
>
> Of course the next question could be why have distros not adopted 2.4, is it just a matter of time or are there other factors?
Speaking for myself, the major barrier to adoption for me is support by third party modules.
What I mean by "support" is that the third party module has completed httpd v2.4 support, and has made a formal release of code with this support in place, and that code is stable. Further to that, the dependent modules must also be available as OS packages. It has been many years since I deployed naked "make install" code onto a box, formal packaging and the ability to roll forward and roll back is mandatory for me, and it has taken a while for these packages to appear.
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Jess Holle <je...@ptc.com>.
For myself the compelling feature of 2.4 is the event MPM.
But it doesn't work on Windows (nor is there an alternative to
thread-per-request processing there). And when HTTPS is used its still
thread-per-request. And of course I need to know mod_jk works
absolutely flawlessly with the event MPM too...
So in the end the even MPM is not all that compelling yet -- for me at
least.
There are a few other features in 2.2 that'd be nice to have, but the
big draw just isn't complete enough in scope.
--
Jess Holle
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Stefan Fritsch <sf...@sfritsch.de>.
On Wednesday 06 February 2013, pfee@talk21.com wrote:
> How many Linux distros ship httpd 2.4?
>
> Fedora 18 is their first release to include httpd 2.4. Since
> Fedora is often an early adopter of new releases, I expect 2.4
> hasn't trickled down to other distributions yet, e.g. RHEL,
> CentOS.
>
> It looks like 2.4 has only got as for as Debian experimental:
> http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=apache
The major blocker for Debian was also the missing mod_perl. But the
2.4 release also happened at a somewhat unfortunate point of time in
the Debian release cycle, so that it would have been a tight race to
get 2.4 in shape in time for Debian 7.0. But right now Debian is
frozen due to the (hopefully soon) release and no major changes are
made in the unstable or testing branches.
And since Ubuntu and all other derivative distributitions pull their
packages from one of these two branches from Debian, none of them is
getting 2.4 before Debian has released 7.0. At least not unless they
invest significant time themselves to do the packaging and testing.
> Ubuntu haven't adopted it yet:
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=apache
>
> Of course the next question could be why have distros not adopted
> 2.4, is it just a matter of time or are there other factors?
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by pf...@talk21.com.
How many Linux distros ship httpd 2.4?
Fedora 18 is their first release to include httpd 2.4. Since Fedora is often an early adopter of new releases, I expect 2.4 hasn't trickled down to other distributions yet, e.g. RHEL, CentOS.
It looks like 2.4 has only got as for as Debian experimental:
http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=apache
Ubuntu haven't adopted it yet: http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=apache
Of course the next question could be why have distros not adopted 2.4, is it just a matter of time or are there other factors?
>________________________________
> From: Kevin A. McGrail <KM...@PCCC.com>
>To: dev@httpd.apache.org; William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, 6 February 2013, 0:47
>Subject: Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
>
>
>I won't be able to make the session but would add that because of a lack of mod perl support with 2.4, we have not fully embraced it.
>
>Might be others in a similar boat!
>Regards,
>KAM
>
>
>"William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>I've found the following data summary very useful in terms of
>>drill-down capability;
>>
>>http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.2/all
>>http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.4/all
>>
>>while their breakdown/segmentation tabulations provide some
>>interesting data such as;
>>
>>http://w3techs.com/technologies/breakdown/ws-apache/operating_system
>>
>>The very limited 'free' tabulation remaining from SecuritySpace
>>seems to back up this assessment;
>>
>>http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/201301/servers.html
>>
>>There seems to be a worthwhile discussion about the challenges
>>presented by 2.4 which have adversely affected its adoption,
>>during the ApacheCon Hackathon Mon 2/25 in Portland. I'd like
>>to set aside time about 11am for that discussion for anyone who
>>wants to participate.
>>
>>Once we take away some good information from that roundtable,
>>it would be worthwhile to hold a BoF later in the week especially
>>for end users who are looking at or challenged by adopting 2.4.
>>
>
>
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Andy Colson <an...@squeakycode.net>.
On 2/7/2013 2:31 AM, Issac Goldstand wrote:
> On 07/02/2013 09:47, Jan Kaluža wrote:
> [snip]
>> The problem is that I have little experience with Perl or mod_perl. I'm
>> trying to improve current situation, but I don't want to be the
>> upstream, because I'm not active mod_perl (or even Perl) user.
>>
> [snip]
>
>>
>> Maybe there is someone here who loves that project so much that he could
>> actually help maintaining it?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jan Kaluza
>
> If I make it to AC (still unsure, unfortunately) and have some time at
> the hackathon (also iffy), I'd be happy to lend a pair of hands and/or
> eyes to help review your changes. Will you be there?
>
> Though I've done XS development, a bit of mod_perl stuff in the past and
> httpd, I don't have time to turn that into a long-term commitment.
>
>
> Issac
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
>
I'm up for working on the code. My C fu is not strong, and I have no XS
experience. But I'm willing. I even tried:
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@perl.apache.org/msg13156.html
But without some hand holding I'm not sure what to do.
-Andy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Jan Kaluza <jk...@redhat.com>.
----- Original Message -----
> On 07/02/2013 09:47, Jan Kaluža wrote:
> [snip]
> > The problem is that I have little experience with Perl or mod_perl.
> > I'm
> > trying to improve current situation, but I don't want to be the
> > upstream, because I'm not active mod_perl (or even Perl) user.
> >
> [snip]
>
> >
> > Maybe there is someone here who loves that project so much that he
> > could
> > actually help maintaining it?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jan Kaluza
>
> If I make it to AC (still unsure, unfortunately) and have some time
> at
> the hackathon (also iffy), I'd be happy to lend a pair of hands
> and/or
> eyes to help review your changes. Will you be there?
I'm afraid I won't be there :(, but I will try to upload and clean all
my patches before that, so if you guys will manage to do something with
mod_perl, you can base it on my work. I can also be online on IRC during
the hackathon.
> Though I've done XS development, a bit of mod_perl stuff in the past
> and
> httpd, I don't have time to turn that into a long-term commitment.
It would be awesome to have someone who understands XS to comment my
patches, because I'm basically learning it on mod_perl and even when it
works, I'm not sure I've done the best decisions or the best way
how to do things.
I'm more than happy to contribute to mod_perl, but not to maintain itt
(at least not for now).
>
> Issac
>
Jan Kaluza
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
On 07/02/2013 09:47, Jan Kaluža wrote:
[snip]
> The problem is that I have little experience with Perl or mod_perl. I'm
> trying to improve current situation, but I don't want to be the
> upstream, because I'm not active mod_perl (or even Perl) user.
>
[snip]
>
> Maybe there is someone here who loves that project so much that he could
> actually help maintaining it?
>
> Regards,
> Jan Kaluza
If I make it to AC (still unsure, unfortunately) and have some time at
the hackathon (also iffy), I'd be happy to lend a pair of hands and/or
eyes to help review your changes. Will you be there?
Though I've done XS development, a bit of mod_perl stuff in the past and
httpd, I don't have time to turn that into a long-term commitment.
Issac
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
On 07/02/2013 09:47, Jan Kaluža wrote:
[snip]
> The problem is that I have little experience with Perl or mod_perl. I'm
> trying to improve current situation, but I don't want to be the
> upstream, because I'm not active mod_perl (or even Perl) user.
>
[snip]
>
> Maybe there is someone here who loves that project so much that he could
> actually help maintaining it?
>
> Regards,
> Jan Kaluza
If I make it to AC (still unsure, unfortunately) and have some time at
the hackathon (also iffy), I'd be happy to lend a pair of hands and/or
eyes to help review your changes. Will you be there?
Though I've done XS development, a bit of mod_perl stuff in the past and
httpd, I don't have time to turn that into a long-term commitment.
Issac
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
On 2/7/2013 2:47 AM, Jan Kaluža wrote:
> On 02/06/2013 01:47 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>> I won't be able to make the session but would add that because of a lack
>> of mod perl support with 2.4, we have not fully embraced it.
>
> I have created lot of patches to build mod_perl with httpd-2.4 and
> sent them upstream. Unfortunately during the last year, there was
> nobody to review them or comment them. Few hours ago I've even ported
> new auth API to mod_perl and I'm going to send it upstream too. There
> were also people who offered their help on mod_perl mailing list with
> no response.
And I appreciate that a lot! I'm not trying to be negative on
mod_perl, just stating a major hurdle we have to deploying 2.4.
> Yesterday I have asked in mod_perl IRC channel to get the commit
> permissions so I could merge my patches with their (really old and
> unusable with current httpd-2.4) httpd24 branch and they agreed. Now
> I'm waiting for mail from PMC to get the permissions.
That is EXCELLENT news.
>
> The problem is that I have little experience with Perl or mod_perl.
> I'm trying to improve current situation, but I don't want to be the
> upstream, because I'm not active mod_perl (or even Perl) user.
>
> So to sum it up, I think the only reason why there's no mod_perl for
> httpd-2.4 is that there are no people who would have time (or be
> interested) in maintaining it.
I think there is a bit of a hurdle for me to even figure out how the
code works because I still have never gotten even a patched version to
compile. I'll see if I can pick back up on the conversation on the MP
list and get it compiled. I've given quite a few dozen hours to looking
at your patches, compiling, recompiling different perls (just to make
sure that wasn't the issue), etc.
Regards,
KAM
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Jan Kaluža <jk...@redhat.com>.
On 02/06/2013 01:47 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> I won't be able to make the session but would add that because of a lack
> of mod perl support with 2.4, we have not fully embraced it.
I have created lot of patches to build mod_perl with httpd-2.4 and sent
them upstream. Unfortunately during the last year, there was nobody to
review them or comment them. Few hours ago I've even ported new auth API
to mod_perl and I'm going to send it upstream too. There were also
people who offered their help on mod_perl mailing list with no response.
Yesterday I have asked in mod_perl IRC channel to get the commit
permissions so I could merge my patches with their (really old and
unusable with current httpd-2.4) httpd24 branch and they agreed. Now I'm
waiting for mail from PMC to get the permissions.
The problem is that I have little experience with Perl or mod_perl. I'm
trying to improve current situation, but I don't want to be the
upstream, because I'm not active mod_perl (or even Perl) user.
So to sum it up, I think the only reason why there's no mod_perl for
httpd-2.4 is that there are no people who would have time (or be
interested) in maintaining it.
Maybe there is someone here who loves that project so much that he could
actually help maintaining it?
Regards,
Jan Kaluza
> Might be others in a similar boat!
> Regards,
> KAM
>
> "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> I've found the following data summary very useful in terms of
> drill-down capability;
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.2/all
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.4/all
>
> while their breakdown/segmentation tabulations provide some
> interesting data such as;
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/breakdown/ws-apache/operating_system
>
> The very limited 'free' tabulation remaining from SecuritySpace
> seems to back up this assessment;
>
> http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/201301/servers.html
>
> There seems to be a worthwhile discussion about the challenges
> presented by 2.4 which have adversely affected its adoption,
> during the ApacheCon Hackathon Mon 2/25 in Portland. I'd like
> to set aside time about 11am for that discussion for anyone who
> wants to participate.
>
> Once we take away some good information from that roundtable,
> it would be worthwhile to hold a BoF later in the week especially
> for end users who are looking at or challenged by adopting 2.4.
>
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by "Kevin A. McGrail" <KM...@PCCC.com>.
I won't be able to make the session but would add that because of a lack of mod perl support with 2.4, we have not fully embraced it.
Might be others in a similar boat!
Regards,
KAM
"William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>I've found the following data summary very useful in terms of
>drill-down capability;
>
>http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.2/all
>http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.4/all
>
>while their breakdown/segmentation tabulations provide some
>interesting data such as;
>
>http://w3techs.com/technologies/breakdown/ws-apache/operating_system
>
>The very limited 'free' tabulation remaining from SecuritySpace
>seems to back up this assessment;
>
>http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/201301/servers.html
>
>There seems to be a worthwhile discussion about the challenges
>presented by 2.4 which have adversely affected its adoption,
>during the ApacheCon Hackathon Mon 2/25 in Portland. I'd like
>to set aside time about 11am for that discussion for anyone who
>wants to participate.
>
>Once we take away some good information from that roundtable,
>it would be worthwhile to hold a BoF later in the week especially
>for end users who are looking at or challenged by adopting 2.4.
Apache 2.4 adoption: Hackathon 11:00am Mon 2/25 Roundtable
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Just a reminder that I'd like to take all this feedback and gather
further dev discussion at the hackathon this coming Monday to get
us closer to 2.4 (and perhaps, a more quickly-adopted 2.6/3.0).
Please join if you can get to Portland this coming Monday :)
TIA,
Bill
On Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:44:43 -0600
"William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> I've found the following data summary very useful in terms of
> drill-down capability;
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.2/all
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.4/all
>
> while their breakdown/segmentation tabulations provide some
> interesting data such as;
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/breakdown/ws-apache/operating_system
>
> The very limited 'free' tabulation remaining from SecuritySpace
> seems to back up this assessment;
>
> http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/201301/servers.html
>
> There seems to be a worthwhile discussion about the challenges
> presented by 2.4 which have adversely affected its adoption,
> during the ApacheCon Hackathon Mon 2/25 in Portland. I'd like
> to set aside time about 11am for that discussion for anyone who
> wants to participate.
>
> Once we take away some good information from that roundtable,
> it would be worthwhile to hold a BoF later in the week especially
> for end users who are looking at or challenged by adopting 2.4.
>
>
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
On 09 Feb 2013, at 10:05 AM, Christophe JAILLET <ch...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Anyway, just my 2 cents:
>
> - providing packages, as already discussed in the list
> ==> would ease distro update or end user installation
We already provide packages for RPM based distributions, and have documented it too: http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/platform/rpm.html
The problem is that other major modules don't, and this delays adoption until they do. Subversion is a good example, while they have a number of people providing distributions, only Summersoft (that I know of) provides drop in replacement for the OS supplied subversion binaries, and the last release they packaged was for the v1.6 series. The other binaries have manual install steps, or deploy to strange non standard places, and this requires lots of documentation and education. You can't just drop the binaries into your internal yum repository and say "yum update", end users have to explicitly download a different package to what they're used to, and then fiddle with paths to get access to it, and this is a big barrier to adoption.
Regards,
Graham
--
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Christophe JAILLET <ch...@wanadoo.fr>.
Le 05/02/2013 23:44, William A. Rowe Jr. a écrit :
> I've found the following data summary very useful in terms of
> drill-down capability;
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.2/all
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.4/all
>
> while their breakdown/segmentation tabulations provide some
> interesting data such as;
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/breakdown/ws-apache/operating_system
I first thought that not providing windows binaries could be an
explanation. The link above clearly show that I'm wrong.
Anyway, just my 2 cents:
- providing packages, as already discussed in the list
==> would ease distro update or end user installation
- providing windows binaries or at least providing a link where
they can be found (http://www.apachelounge.com ?)
==> could help people do some testing or set up small web servers within
companies. I think that many companies are running such servers for
there own use, and that they can not be measured by the links above or
by netcraft.
- when I google to find some doc on parameters or so in apache, I
arrive most on the time on the 2.2 documentation on apache.org. Could
these 'old' pages state that the 2.4 serie is available
==> would encourage users to update
- could it be useful to have in apache an automatic check for the
availability of a newer version ?
- it could be logged in errorLog or could send an email to the
server administrator to encourage him to upgrade
- maybe just a line in mod_status
==> would encourage administrators of small server to upgrade. IMO,
wouldn't have an impact on larger companies which should already keep an
eye on bug fix releases or new major version
- I've read in the list that one of the reason could be the lack of
support for some modules in 2.4. Could it be useful to have a module
that would harvest some data in oder to let the apache community know
which modules are really in use ? A kind of mod_feeback that would send
conf file or parts of it to an apache.org server ?
==> better knowing what is used, would help to see what is missing or
what should be cared at
==> could be linked to modules.apache.org to define a kind of module
popularity on running systems
==> ... but would require time to analyze
- providing some benchmarks that compare 2.2 and 2.4 to show the
speed impact of using mod_event or other new functionalities. To show
the evolution of memory requirement.
==> would provide figures explaining why it worse upgrading
- add some new functionalities
==> automatic crash report ?
==> provide a GUI for conf file management ?
==> allow errorlog to be stored within a database to potentially ease
research within log ?
Hope that some ideas are interesting.
CJ
Re: Apache 2.4 adoption
Posted by Christophe JAILLET <ch...@wanadoo.fr>.
Le 05/02/2013 23:44, William A. Rowe Jr. a écrit :
> I've found the following data summary very useful in terms of
> drill-down capability;
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.2/all
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ws-apache/2.4/all
>
> while their breakdown/segmentation tabulations provide some
> interesting data such as;
>
> http://w3techs.com/technologies/breakdown/ws-apache/operating_system
I first thought that not providing windows binaries could be an
explanation. The link above clearly show that I'm wrong.
Anyway, just my 2 cents:
- providing packages, as already discussed in the list
==> would ease distro update or end user installation
- providing windows binaries or at least providing a link where
they can be found (http://www.apachelounge.com ?)
==> could help people do some testing or set up small web servers within
companies. I think that many companies are running such servers for
there own use, and that they can not be measured by the links above or
by netcraft.
- when I google to find some doc on parameters or so in apache, I
arrive most on the time on the 2.2 documentation on apache.org. Could
these 'old' pages state that the 2.4 serie is available
==> would encourage users to update
- could it be useful to have in apache an automatic check for the
availability of a newer version ?
- it could be logged in errorLog or could send an email to the
server administrator to encourage him to upgrade
- maybe just a line in mod_status
==> would encourage administrators of small server to upgrade. IMO,
wouldn't have an impact on larger companies which should already keep an
eye on bug fix releases or new major version
- I've read in the list that one of the reason could be the lack of
support for some modules in 2.4. Could it be useful to have a module
that would harvest some data in oder to let the apache community know
which modules are really in use ? A kind of mod_feeback that would send
conf file or parts of it to an apache.org server ?
==> better knowing what is used, would help to see what is missing or
what should be cared at
==> could be linked to modules.apache.org to define a kind of module
popularity on running systems
==> ... but would require time to analyze
- providing some benchmarks that compare 2.2 and 2.4 to show the
speed impact of using mod_event or other new functionalities. To show
the evolution of memory requirement.
==> would provide figures explaining why it worse upgrading
- add some new functionalities
==> automatic crash report ?
==> provide a GUI for conf file management ?
==> allow errorlog to be stored within a database to potentially ease
research within log ?
Hope that some ideas are interesting.
CJ