You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org> on 2002/03/27 03:28:37 UTC
[Fwd: [PATCH scoreboard] adding port entry]
Is there anything wrong with this patch? Thanks.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [PATCH scoreboard] adding port entry
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:58:31 +0800 (SGT)
From: Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
When running port based vhosts we want to see the ports in the
mod_status's output (or other tools working with scoreboard). Otherwise
there is no added value in displaying vhosts entry at all.
The following patch adds the port entry to the worker_score struct. And
I've a patch for mod_status, but will wait first for Jeff to commit my
previous patch and the post it here.
Index: include/scoreboard.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/include/scoreboard.h,v
retrieving revision 1.44
diff -u -r1.44 scoreboard.h
--- include/scoreboard.h 13 Mar 2002 20:47:42 -0000 1.44
+++ include/scoreboard.h 15 Mar 2002 03:47:46 -0000
@@ -75,6 +75,7 @@
#include "apr_thread_proc.h"
#include "apr_portable.h"
#include "apr_shm.h"
+#include "apr_network_io.h"
/* Scoreboard file, if there is one */
#ifndef DEFAULT_SCOREBOARD
@@ -156,6 +157,7 @@
char client[32]; /* Keep 'em small... */
char request[64]; /* We just want an idea... */
char vhost[32]; /* What virtual host is being accessed? */
+ apr_port_t port; /* On which port */
};
typedef struct {
Index: server/scoreboard.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/httpd-2.0/server/scoreboard.c,v
retrieving revision 1.62
diff -u -r1.62 scoreboard.c
--- server/scoreboard.c 13 Mar 2002 20:48:00 -0000 1.62
+++ server/scoreboard.c 15 Mar 2002 03:47:46 -0000
@@ -464,6 +464,7 @@
}
apr_cpystrn(ws->vhost, r->server->server_hostname,
sizeof(ws->vhost));
+ ws->port = r->server->port;
}
}
_____________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide http://perl.apache.org/guide
mailto:stas@stason.org http://ticketmaster.com http://apacheweek.com
http://singlesheaven.com http://perl.apache.org http://perlmonth.com/
--
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: [Fwd: [PATCH scoreboard] adding port entry]
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> At 10:28 AM +0800 3/27/02, Stas Bekman wrote:
>
>>Is there anything wrong with this patch? Thanks.
>>
>
>
> Nothing that I can see... I just don't see the need. We assume that
> knowledge of the virtual host implies knowledge of the IP address
> and port. We don't place the IP address of IP-based vhosts in the
> 'board.
When you look at the output of mod_status (or Apache::VMonitor, the perl
brother of mod_status) you cannot tell one port based vhost from
another. Users ask me to present this info in Apache::VMonitor, because
they want to tell one vhost from another in the output, but I cannot
help them if the scoreboard doesn't have this info.
As for IP addresses, why not adding these too in parallel with ports?
After all mod_status is for showing the status of the server, why not
showing information that's useful and essential to users of this module?
Thanks.
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: [Fwd: [PATCH scoreboard] adding port entry]
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
At 10:28 AM +0800 3/27/02, Stas Bekman wrote:
>Is there anything wrong with this patch? Thanks.
>
Nothing that I can see... I just don't see the need. We assume that
knowledge of the virtual host implies knowledge of the IP address
and port. We don't place the IP address of IP-based vhosts in the
'board.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson