You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to modperl@perl.apache.org by Vincent Veyron <vv...@wanadoo.fr> on 2012/02/28 18:14:20 UTC
Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Le mercredi 22 février 2012 à 13:37 +0100, Torsten Förtsch a écrit :
> Unfortunately, last year generated quite a lot of work. There was perl 5.14
> with a few incompatible changes and the upcoming httpd 2.4. Not to forget the
> transition from LWP 5.x to LWP 6.x which our test-suite is based upon. And
> developer time is a scarce resource since none of us is paid for it (at least
> I am not). If someone wants to invest money please do.
Hi Torsten,
I am a tiny one-man company using mod_perl with great success(*) and
pleasure, and your post has me very worried that it could end in a
hurry :-(
Can't the ASF dedicate some funds for that, to pay for your work?
Also, I wonder what the big players who subscribe to this list think of
such a situation?
(* : in the sense that it enables me to do things I could not dream of
with standard proprietary sofware)
--
Vincent Veyron
http://marica.fr/
Logiciel de gestion des sinistres et des contentieux pour le service juridique
how does mod_perl handle client certificates
Posted by Jim Schueler <js...@eloquency.com>.
How does mod_perl handle client certificates using the Apache object?
Thanks!
Re: Using Apache v1
Posted by Chris Olive <ch...@TechnologEase.com>.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Michael Peters <mp...@plusthree.com>wrote:
> On 02/28/2012 02:28 PM, Chris Olive wrote:
>
>> Last I checked, Apache was still providing patches and releases for the
>> v1 base as well.
>>
>
> This is not the case. V1 has been "End of Lifed" and won't receive any new
> releases, not even security related ones.
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/**1.3/ <http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/>
Time flies. I obviously haven't checked in a while and now that you
mention it, I do recall getting a message stating such a while back.
Thanks for the correction. The v1 line of Apache was like a Chevy pickup
truck. I know I even went back to it a couple of times over MP2 install
issues after v2 came out.
>
>
> There are a lot of people still using it, at least
>> that is also my perception.
>>
>
> This is probably true. We are stilling using V1 with mod_perl as an app
> server behind a V2 proxy. But we definitely have plans to change this
> because of the security implications of running something that will never
> receive any further security fixes.
Good idea.
>
>
> --
> Michael Peters
> Plus Three, LP
>
>
--
-----
*Chris Olive* | *Principal Consultant* | TechnologEase
LLC<http://www.TechnologEase.com>
*email*: chris@TechnologEase.com | *cell*: 651-327-9058 | *twitter*:
@TechnologEase
Re: Using Apache v1
Posted by Michael Peters <mp...@plusthree.com>.
On 02/28/2012 02:28 PM, Chris Olive wrote:
> Last I checked, Apache was still providing patches and releases for the
> v1 base as well.
This is not the case. V1 has been "End of Lifed" and won't receive any
new releases, not even security related ones.
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/
> There are a lot of people still using it, at least
> that is also my perception.
This is probably true. We are stilling using V1 with mod_perl as an app
server behind a V2 proxy. But we definitely have plans to change this
because of the security implications of running something that will
never receive any further security fixes.
--
Michael Peters
Plus Three, LP
Re: Using Apache v1
Posted by Chris Olive <ch...@TechnologEase.com>.
Last I checked, Apache was still providing patches and releases for the v1
base as well. There are a lot of people still using it, at least that is
also my perception.
chris
-----
*Chris Olive* | *Principal Consultant* | TechnologEase
LLC<http://www.technologease.com/>
*email*: chris@TechnologEase.com | *work*: 651-207-8182 | *cell*:
651-327-9058 | *twitter*: @TechnologEase
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Dave Morgan <da...@coolplaces.ca>wrote:
> On 28/02/12 11:59 AM, Randolf Richardson wrote:
> Snip....
>
> Are a lot of people still using the version 1 series of httpd
>> and/or
>> mod_perl?
>>
> Lots :) My codebase is apache/mod-perl independent and yet we still
> have v1 servers around. Hardware upgrades are scheduled for later
> this year or next year so we will retire the v1 stuff when the
> hardware gets changed out.
>
> The reason we still use v1 is it is/was a custom compiled
> perl/apache/mod_perl/ssl binary. All of our v2 is handled
> by the applicable package manager.
>
> HTH
> Dave
>
> --
> Dave Morgan
> Operations Manager, Cool Places In Canada
> http://www.coolplaces.ca
> dave.morgan@coolplaces.ca
> 403 288 8759 / 866 938 0516
>
Using Apache v1
Posted by Dave Morgan <da...@coolplaces.ca>.
On 28/02/12 11:59 AM, Randolf Richardson wrote:
Snip....
> Are a lot of people still using the version 1 series of httpd and/or
> mod_perl?
Lots :) My codebase is apache/mod-perl independent and yet we still
have v1 servers around. Hardware upgrades are scheduled for later
this year or next year so we will retire the v1 stuff when the
hardware gets changed out.
The reason we still use v1 is it is/was a custom compiled
perl/apache/mod_perl/ssl binary. All of our v2 is handled
by the applicable package manager.
HTH
Dave
--
Dave Morgan
Operations Manager, Cool Places In Canada
http://www.coolplaces.ca
dave.morgan@coolplaces.ca
403 288 8759 / 866 938 0516
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Randolf Richardson <ra...@modperl.pl>.
> 2012/2/28 Vincent Veyron <vv...@wanadoo.fr>:
> > I am a tiny one-man company using mod_perl with great success(*) and
> > pleasure, and your post has me very worried that it could end in a
> > hurry :-(
I depend on mod_perl2 for nearly all the web sites that I maintain,
and I've been trying to encourage others to use the same technology
(it's more challenging with the hundreds of voices pushing PHP
compared to my one voice promoting ModPerl, but I don't consider this
a valid justification for discouragement).
You probably also enjoy the efficient response times to HTTP clients
and the direct server-side access to the API via APR, etc. All this
and the many other things that ModPerl provides is of tremendous
worth in my strong opinion.
> Don't panic! There's no immediate danger to mod_perl, and most people
> are not trying to run on the very latest versions of perl and apache.
> Even if mod_perl someday stops being developed for new versions of
> perl and apache, there will be no immediate need to move off it and
> plenty of alternatives available.
That's re-assuring. Thanks.
> > Can't the ASF dedicate some funds for that, to pay for your work?
>
> No, that's not how the ASF works. Coding is a volunteer effort.
> Money is spent on infrastructure like hosting.
>
> > Also, I wonder what the big players who subscribe to this list think of
> > such a situation?
>
> It's fine for people to make their own deals to sponsor developers.
> Some companies who need something will pay their own developers to
> build it. Most likely, no one has needed this enough to develop it
> yet. (Because they're all running apache 1.3...)
The last time I used Apache HTTPd v1.anything on my servers was when
I was hosting a few hundred web sites on Novell NetWare. When I
migrated to NetBSD there was Apache HTTPd v2.something and so I used
the migration as an opportunity to perform the massive code upgrades
to mod_perl2 (this was not a small effort, but it also wasn't overly
complicated for the most part after getting used to the changes).
I hear rumours from time-to-time that SlashDot continues to use
mod_perl1, but considering that mod_perl2 has been available for so
long now I always doubted it under the assumption that most people
would have upgraded by now.
Are a lot of people still using the version 1 series of httpd and/or
mod_perl?
Randolf Richardson - randolf@inter-corporate.com
Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.
Beautiful British Columbia, Canada
http://www.inter-corporate.com/
Re: Funding
Posted by Vincent Veyron <vv...@wanadoo.fr>.
Le mercredi 07 mars 2012 à 17:06 +0100, Torsten Förtsch a écrit :
Hi Torsten,
> On Tuesday, 28 February 2012 18:14:20 Vincent Veyron wrote:
> your post has me very worried that it could end in a
> > hurry
>
> So am I and so are many (perhaps most) of the other contributors.
Perrin was a bit more re-assuring than you are in a previous post?
> What I am
> trying to say is, if modperl is the basis of your business why don't you start
> contribute? You'll be in good and friendly company.
>
Hey, I have no doubts about the friendly company.
But I did contribute : the application in my sig, that uses mod_perl,
makes the ecosystem stronger : while it exists, it will help in keeping
it alive.
> Give it time and modperl will support httpd 2.4. But it requires work
> to be done. You can help.
I try to help on the political side : implementing wherever I can.
However I find that centralized management and open source don't mix
well, so getting the funds for that work appears to be a real fight.
> it occurred to me that the creators of
>all of these shining open source
> programs are not god-like creatures but people like you and me.
Just to let you know, to me, you _are_ one of those god-like creatures
that make this awesome stuff :-)
--
Vincent Veyron
http://marica.fr/
Logiciel de gestion des sinistres et des contentieux pour le service juridique
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Torsten Förtsch <to...@gmx.net>.
On Tuesday, 28 February 2012 18:14:20 Vincent Veyron wrote:
> I am a tiny one-man company using mod_perl with great success(*) and
> pleasure, and your post has me very worried that it could end in a
> hurry
So am I and so are many (perhaps most) of the other contributors. What I am
trying to say is, if modperl is the basis of your business why don't you start
contribute? You'll be in good and friendly company.
This is how I got to modperl. In the late 1990ies I did a project involving
mp1. That was almost my first encounter with Perl. A few years later that
client wanted to switch to httpd 2.0. So, they hired me again. At that time I
had a few years of experience in Perl. I also had skimmed through
perlxs/guts/api but was far from understanding it. I had tried a few examples
but that was all.
One of the first things I did for modperl was a fix for APR::Base64.I had
noticed that one of encode() or decode() left a superfluous \0 byte at the end
of the resulting string. Of course I could switch to MIME::Base64 and forget
about APR::Base64. But that would mean to dupliate the code to work with
base64 encoding - something I don't like at all. So, I tried to fix the bug
and surprisingly succeeded. It wasn't by far as complicated as I had expected.
In the end the patch I sent to the mailing list didn't get applied as I had
sent it, I think (but maybe this was another patch). Someone more experienced
had found a better solution.
At that time I had reported to my client that mp2 works. I also had read the
docs and was intrigued by "PerlInterpScope handler". I had asked on the users
list if it was a good idea to use it and was encouraged by Stas to go ahead.
Well, it was disastrous and I ended up hacking modperl_interp.c. I think I
have found and fixed a few bugs. And - much more important - I have learned a
big deal about httpd, modperl and perl. Also, before that time I seldom
reported bugs or wrote to mailing lists. I was too shy - my command of English
was embarrassing.
Also, it occurred to me that the creators of all of these shining open source
programs are not god-like creatures but people like you and me. And if I want
these projects to succeed I have to contribute my share.
I didn't want to worry you. Quite the contrary, I wanted to encourage people
to join. Give it time and modperl will support httpd 2.4. But it requires work
to be done. You can help.
Sorry for the late reply, I was on vacation.
Torsten Förtsch
--
Need professional modperl support? Hire me! (http://foertsch.name)
Like fantasy? http://kabatinte.net
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Dave Hodgkinson <da...@gmail.com>.
On 29 Feb 2012, at 19:33, Dan Axtell wrote:
>
> Basically I want to have various virtual hosts be reverse proxied to various
> back end servers (e.g. mod_perl for some legacy apps, a Catalyst app under
> fast CGI). I tried this with Nginx and it all seemed to work but what I
> discovered is that over time the backend Apache processes were using more and
> more memory, whereas when I go back to a monolithic Apache the memory usage
> stays pretty stable.
Your fat apache is an application server. Only have sufficient MaxClients to saturate
CPU if you hammer it. Recycle memory with a sensible MaxRequestsPerChild. Make
forking new children cheap by loading the world in startup.pl.
Read Stas's guide.
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Dan Axtell <da...@snet.net> wrote:
> Basically I want to have various virtual hosts be reverse proxied to various
> back end servers (e.g. mod_perl for some legacy apps, a Catalyst app under
> fast CGI). I tried this with Nginx and it all seemed to work but what I
> discovered is that over time the backend Apache processes were using more and
> more memory, whereas when I go back to a monolithic Apache the memory usage
> stays pretty stable.
That's odd. I would check how you have Keep-Alive configured and how
long you let the mod_perl processes live (MaxRequestsPerChild) in both
cases. Nginx should be just fine as a proxy.
> In your slideshow you talk about using Apache with a threaded worker MPM as
> the frontend and a prefork MPM as the backend. So I'm trying to set that up
> with Apache 2.2.22 but I'm having problems serving basic content (I'm getting
> text but not formatted HTML)
Sounds like a missing content-type header.
> Is there a recommended version of Apache for doing this?
It's mod_proxy configuration. There are lots of guides on how to do
it, including some on the mod_perl site. Search for mod_proxy or
reverse proxy.
- Perrin
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Dan Axtell <da...@snet.net>.
>
> There's also a talk I gave a couple of years ago about non-plack
> options, like nginx+fastcgi:
> http://elem.com/~perrin/web_arch.pdf.gz
>
Thanks for posting this. I understand the general idea of having a
lightweight server on port 80 to handle static content and reverse proxying to
another server on the back end for dynamic content, but have difficulty making
this work in practice.
Basically I want to have various virtual hosts be reverse proxied to various
back end servers (e.g. mod_perl for some legacy apps, a Catalyst app under
fast CGI). I tried this with Nginx and it all seemed to work but what I
discovered is that over time the backend Apache processes were using more and
more memory, whereas when I go back to a monolithic Apache the memory usage
stays pretty stable.
In your slideshow you talk about using Apache with a threaded worker MPM as
the frontend and a prefork MPM as the backend. So I'm trying to set that up
with Apache 2.2.22 but I'm having problems serving basic content (I'm getting
text but not formatted HTML)
Is there a recommended version of Apache for doing this? I've been googling
around for detailed info on how to do this and found a few things, but any
links or suggestions are greatly appreciated.
Dan
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against
httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Vincent Veyron <vv...@wanadoo.fr>.
Le mardi 28 février 2012 à 17:27 -0500, Perrin Harkins a écrit :
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Jan Dubois <ja...@activestate.com> wrote:
> > I find this talk an excellent overview of all the different ways to
> > deploy Perl (PSGI) applications:
> >
> > http://www.slideshare.net/miyagawa/deploying-plack-web-applications-oscon-2011-8706659
>
> There's also a talk I gave a couple of years ago about non-plack
> options, like nginx+fastcgi:
> http://elem.com/~perrin/web_arch.pdf.gz
>
Wow! Rich environment indeed...
It is very reassuring to know that mod_perl is doing fine and that we
also have all these fallback solutions.
Open source is really amazing.
--
Vincent Veyron
http://marica.fr/
Logiciel de gestion des sinistres et des contentieux pour le service juridique
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>.
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Jan Dubois <ja...@activestate.com> wrote:
> I find this talk an excellent overview of all the different ways to
> deploy Perl (PSGI) applications:
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/miyagawa/deploying-plack-web-applications-oscon-2011-8706659
There's also a talk I gave a couple of years ago about non-plack
options, like nginx+fastcgi:
http://elem.com/~perrin/web_arch.pdf.gz
- Perrin
RE: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Jan Dubois <ja...@activestate.com>.
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Vincent Veyron wrote:
> Le mardi 28 février 2012 à 13:46 -0500, Perrin Harkins a écrit :
>
> > Even if mod_perl someday stops being developed for new versions of
> > perl and apache, there will be no immediate need to move off it and
> > plenty of alternatives available.
>
> Do you think nginx+perl could be one of those alternatives?
I find this talk an excellent overview of all the different ways to
deploy Perl (PSGI) applications:
http://www.slideshare.net/miyagawa/deploying-plack-web-applications-oscon-2011-8706659
Cheers,
-Jan
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against
httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Vincent Veyron <vv...@wanadoo.fr>.
Le mardi 28 février 2012 à 13:46 -0500, Perrin Harkins a écrit :
> Even if mod_perl someday stops being developed for new versions of
> perl and apache, there will be no immediate need to move off it and
> plenty of alternatives available.
>
Do you think nginx+perl could be one of those alternatives?
--
Vincent Veyron
http://marica.fr/
Logiciel de gestion des sinistres et des contentieux pour le service juridique
Re: Funding [WAS :Re: trying to compile mod_perl against httpd-2.4.1]
Posted by Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>.
2012/2/28 Vincent Veyron <vv...@wanadoo.fr>:
> I am a tiny one-man company using mod_perl with great success(*) and
> pleasure, and your post has me very worried that it could end in a
> hurry :-(
Don't panic! There's no immediate danger to mod_perl, and most people
are not trying to run on the very latest versions of perl and apache.
Even if mod_perl someday stops being developed for new versions of
perl and apache, there will be no immediate need to move off it and
plenty of alternatives available.
> Can't the ASF dedicate some funds for that, to pay for your work?
No, that's not how the ASF works. Coding is a volunteer effort.
Money is spent on infrastructure like hosting.
> Also, I wonder what the big players who subscribe to this list think of
> such a situation?
It's fine for people to make their own deals to sponsor developers.
Some companies who need something will pay their own developers to
build it. Most likely, no one has needed this enough to develop it
yet. (Because they're all running apache 1.3...)
- Perrin