You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Ian Holsman <ia...@cnet.com> on 2001/09/06 22:36:06 UTC
the filesmatch directive / map_to_storage
I've found a small problem (probably more a documentation problem)
<FilesMatch> only works for 'file-based' storage.
so, using it to set the INCLUDES filter on a page delivered by mod-proxy
doesn't work.
Also .. on another documentation point.
it is possible for mod-include to NOT check for 'options' include,
and remove the keyword altogether. seeing how you have to set the
outputfilter anyway it's doubling up, and also a source for
configuration errors.
..Ian
--
Ian Holsman IanH@cnet.com
Performance Measurement & Analysis
CNET Networks - (415) 364-8608
Re: the filesmatch directive / map_to_storage
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
From: "Ian Holsman" <ia...@cnet.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 1:36 PM
> I've found a small problem (probably more a documentation problem)
>
> <FilesMatch> only works for 'file-based' storage.
>
> so, using it to set the INCLUDES filter on a page delivered by mod-proxy
> doesn't work.
Please consider this...
<FilesMatch index\..*>
something
</FilesMatch>
Request http://someserver/somepath/index.shtml/foo/bar/more
The FilesMatch tests 'more'. That is not the 'file' served (index.shtml)
but we can't determine that it happens to be query_info because the file
is _not_ in our file system.
Agreed this needs to be documented, unless we decide to attempt this behavior
in spite of it's problems. Options?
> Also .. on another documentation point.
> it is possible for mod-include to NOT check for 'options' include,
> and remove the keyword altogether. seeing how you have to set the
> outputfilter anyway it's doubling up, and also a source for
> configuration errors.
I'm thinking we 'generally' should drop duplicates, but that's a pretty deep
question where we might have more than one transformation by the same filter.
Opinions?
Re: the filesmatch directive / map_to_storage
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
From: "Ian Holsman" <ia...@cnet.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 1:36 PM
> I've found a small problem (probably more a documentation problem)
>
> <FilesMatch> only works for 'file-based' storage.
>
> so, using it to set the INCLUDES filter on a page delivered by mod-proxy
> doesn't work.
Please consider this...
<FilesMatch index\..*>
something
</FilesMatch>
Request http://someserver/somepath/index.shtml/foo/bar/more
The FilesMatch tests 'more'. That is not the 'file' served (index.shtml)
but we can't determine that it happens to be query_info because the file
is _not_ in our file system.
Agreed this needs to be documented, unless we decide to attempt this behavior
in spite of it's problems. Options?
> Also .. on another documentation point.
> it is possible for mod-include to NOT check for 'options' include,
> and remove the keyword altogether. seeing how you have to set the
> outputfilter anyway it's doubling up, and also a source for
> configuration errors.
I'm thinking we 'generally' should drop duplicates, but that's a pretty deep
question where we might have more than one transformation by the same filter.
Opinions?