You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> on 2008/02/08 16:07:40 UTC
PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it
part of the 'all' setting
in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap). And hence
make it part of the
general body distributed by the vendors (who seem to follow our "all"
config).
I'd almost argue to make at least disk cache and normal cashe a 'MOST'.
Dw
Index: modules/cache/config.m4
===================================================================
--- modules/cache/config.m4 (revision 618646)
+++ modules/cache/config.m4 (working copy)
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
APACHE_MODPATH_INIT(cache)
-APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache, , , no)
+APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache, , , "")
dnl # list of object files for mod_cache
cache_objs="dnl
@@ -19,8 +19,8 @@
cache_pqueue.lo dnl
cache_hash.lo dnl
"
-APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , no)
-APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , no)
-APACHE_MODULE(mem_cache, memory caching module, $mem_cache_objs, , no)
+APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , "")
+APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , "")
+APACHE_MODULE(mem_cache, memory caching module, $mem_cache_objs, , "")
APACHE_MODPATH_FINISH
Index: CHANGES
===================================================================
--- CHANGES (revision 618646)
+++ CHANGES (working copy)
@@ -2,6 +2,9 @@
Changes with Apache 2.3.0
[ When backported to 2.2.x, remove entry from this file ]
+ *) Install mod_cache.h and include the stable cache modules in the
'all'
+ configuratin option.
+
*) ab: Use a 64 bit unsigned int instead of a signed long to count
the
bytes transferred to avoid integer overflows. PR 44346
[Ruediger Pluem]
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Feb 9, 2008, at 1:42 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2008 7:37 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>
> wrote:
>> Unless you swap in some third party (memcached, distcache, commercial
>> netapp) module.
>
> But, if we want a 'good' out-of-the-box experience, then it sounds
> like we should enable mod_disk_cache too. Similarly, it wouldn't make
> sense to have mod_proxy enabled if we don't enable http or ajp
> providers by default either. =) -- justin
>
Again, +1
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Paul Querna <ch...@force-elite.com>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2008 7:37 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
>> Unless you swap in some third party (memcached, distcache, commercial
>> netapp) module.
>
> But, if we want a 'good' out-of-the-box experience, then it sounds
> like we should enable mod_disk_cache too. Similarly, it wouldn't make
> sense to have mod_proxy enabled if we don't enable http or ajp
> providers by default either. =) -- justin
+1
-Paul
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Issac Goldstand <ma...@beamartyr.net>.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2008 7:37 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
>
>> Unless you swap in some third party (memcached, distcache, commercial
>> netapp) module.
>>
>
> But, if we want a 'good' out-of-the-box experience, then it sounds
> like we should enable mod_disk_cache too. Similarly, it wouldn't make
> sense to have mod_proxy enabled if we don't enable http or ajp
> providers by default either. =) -- justin
>
+1 FWIW
Issac
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Feb 9, 2008 7:37 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
> Unless you swap in some third party (memcached, distcache, commercial
> netapp) module.
But, if we want a 'good' out-of-the-box experience, then it sounds
like we should enable mod_disk_cache too. Similarly, it wouldn't make
sense to have mod_proxy enabled if we don't enable http or ajp
providers by default either. =) -- justin
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>.
On Feb 9, 2008, at 6:15 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
> On 02/09/2008 04:28 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>> Ok - so I think this compromise makes the most sense
>> ALL everything except demo, experimental and things like
>> bucketeer, import/export filters.
>> MOST all the stable things - including the proxy modules (And
>> given the questions on mailing lists and wiki's - that really
>> is something people seem to exepct).
>> And at the same exempt ssl because of crypto and mod_mem_cache
>> as it has not had that much tender lover and care recently.
>> Makes sense ?
>> Dw.
>
>> Index: modules/cache/config.m4
>> ===================================================================
>> --- modules/cache/config.m4 (revision 620132)
>> +++ modules/cache/config.m4 (working copy)
>> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
>> APACHE_MODPATH_INIT(cache)
>> -APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache, , , no)
>> +APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache)
>> dnl # list of object files for mod_cache
>> cache_objs="dnl
>> @@ -19,8 +19,8 @@
>> cache_pqueue.lo dnl
>> cache_hash.lo dnl
>> "
>> -APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , no)
>> -APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , no)
>> +APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , yes)
>> +APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , most)
>
> Hm. Does this make sense? We now have the cache enabled by default,
> but
> no backend provider. Thus mod_cache cannot be used in this case.
Unless you swap in some third party (memcached, distcache, commercial
netapp) module.
> Only most / all / --enable-disk-cache give us mod_cache with at least
> one backend provider.
Dw.
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org>.
On 02/09/2008 04:28 PM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> Ok - so I think this compromise makes the most sense
>
> ALL everything except demo, experimental and things like
> bucketeer, import/export filters.
>
> MOST all the stable things - including the proxy modules (And
> given the questions on mailing lists and wiki's - that really
> is something people seem to exepct).
>
> And at the same exempt ssl because of crypto and mod_mem_cache
> as it has not had that much tender lover and care recently.
>
> Makes sense ?
>
> Dw.
>
> Index: modules/cache/config.m4
> ===================================================================
> --- modules/cache/config.m4 (revision 620132)
> +++ modules/cache/config.m4 (working copy)
> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
>
> APACHE_MODPATH_INIT(cache)
>
> -APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache, , , no)
> +APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache)
>
> dnl # list of object files for mod_cache
> cache_objs="dnl
> @@ -19,8 +19,8 @@
> cache_pqueue.lo dnl
> cache_hash.lo dnl
> "
> -APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , no)
> -APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , no)
> +APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , yes)
> +APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , most)
Hm. Does this make sense? We now have the cache enabled by default, but
no backend provider. Thus mod_cache cannot be used in this case.
Only most / all / --enable-disk-cache give us mod_cache with at least
one backend provider.
Regards
Rüdiger
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>.
Ok - so I think this compromise makes the most sense
ALL everything except demo, experimental and things like
bucketeer, import/export filters.
MOST all the stable things - including the proxy modules (And
given the questions on mailing lists and wiki's - that really
is something people seem to exepct).
And at the same exempt ssl because of crypto and mod_mem_cache
as it has not had that much tender lover and care recently.
Makes sense ?
Dw.
Index: CHANGES
===================================================================
--- CHANGES (revision 620135)
+++ CHANGES (working copy)
@@ -2,6 +2,11 @@
Changes with Apache 2.3.0
[ When backported to 2.2.x, remove entry from this file ]
+ *) The configuration directive --enable-modules=MODULE-LIST and
+ --enable-mods-shared "ALL" now includes all modules but
+ mod_ssl and the experimental/debug modules. 'Most' now also
+ includes the proxy modules and mod_disk_cache.
+
Index: modules/proxy/config.m4
===================================================================
--- modules/proxy/config.m4 (revision 620132)
+++ modules/proxy/config.m4 (working copy)
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
elif test "$enable_proxy" = "yes"; then
proxy_mods_enable=yes
else
- proxy_mods_enable=no
+ proxy_mods_enable=most
fi
proxy_objs="mod_proxy.lo proxy_util.lo"
Index: modules/cache/config.m4
===================================================================
--- modules/cache/config.m4 (revision 620132)
+++ modules/cache/config.m4 (working copy)
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
APACHE_MODPATH_INIT(cache)
-APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache, , , no)
+APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache)
dnl # list of object files for mod_cache
cache_objs="dnl
@@ -19,8 +19,8 @@
cache_pqueue.lo dnl
cache_hash.lo dnl
"
-APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , no)
-APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , no)
+APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , yes)
+APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , most)
APACHE_MODULE(mem_cache, memory caching module, $mem_cache_objs, , no)
APACHE_MODPATH_FINISH
4x4:httpd-trunk dirkx$ vi CHANGES
4x4:httpd-trunk dirkx$ svn diff
Index: CHANGES
===================================================================
--- CHANGES (revision 620135)
+++ CHANGES (working copy)
@@ -2,6 +2,12 @@
Changes with Apache 2.3.0
[ When backported to 2.2.x, remove entry from this file ]
+ *) The configuration directive --enable-modules=MODULE-LIST and
+ --enable-mods-shared "ALL" now includes all modules but
+ mod_ssl and the experimental/debug modules. 'Most' now also
+ includes the proxy modules and mod_disk_cache. mod_memory_cache
+ is still 'no' - as maintenance lags. [Dirk-Willem van Gulik]
+
*) Also install mod_so.h, mod_rewrite.h and mod_cache.h; as these
contain public function declarations which are useful for
third party module authors [Dirk-Willem van Gulik].
Index: modules/proxy/config.m4
===================================================================
--- modules/proxy/config.m4 (revision 620132)
+++ modules/proxy/config.m4 (working copy)
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
elif test "$enable_proxy" = "yes"; then
proxy_mods_enable=yes
else
- proxy_mods_enable=no
+ proxy_mods_enable=most
fi
proxy_objs="mod_proxy.lo proxy_util.lo"
Index: modules/cache/config.m4
===================================================================
--- modules/cache/config.m4 (revision 620132)
+++ modules/cache/config.m4 (working copy)
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
APACHE_MODPATH_INIT(cache)
-APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache, , , no)
+APACHE_MODULE(file_cache, File cache)
dnl # list of object files for mod_cache
cache_objs="dnl
@@ -19,8 +19,8 @@
cache_pqueue.lo dnl
cache_hash.lo dnl
"
-APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , no)
-APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , no)
+APACHE_MODULE(cache, dynamic file caching, $cache_objs, , yes)
+APACHE_MODULE(disk_cache, disk caching module, , , most)
APACHE_MODULE(mem_cache, memory caching module, $mem_cache_objs, , no)
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Erik Abele <er...@codefaktor.de>.
On 08.02.2008, at 23:57, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
> On 02/08/2008 07:58 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>
>>> On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:07:40 +0100
>>>> Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it
>>>>> part of the 'all' setting
>>>>> in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap). And
>>>>> hence
>>>>> make it part of the
>>>>> general body distributed by the vendors (who seem to follow our
>>>>> "all" config).
>>>>
>>>> That begs the question, what do we mean by "all"? It currently
>>>> excludes proxy and dav, as well as the modules you mention.
>>>> That's IMHO rather more confusing than it should be.
>>>
>>> +1 :)
>>
>> +1 - there's only two classes of exceptions IMHO - those would be
>> SSL,
>> and pure test modules. And I'm +/-0 on including those test
>> modules in
>> 'all' (but never in 'most').
>>
>> My personal preference is that ANY production module, except for
>> SSL, is
>> automatically grabbed up with "all". So proxy and dav are
>> mistakes IMHO.
>
> +1 to this, but keep the test modules out of 'all'.
+1, please no debug/test modules in 'all'.
Cheers,
Erik
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org>.
On 02/08/2008 07:58 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:07:40 +0100
>>> Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it
>>>> part of the 'all' setting
>>>> in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap). And hence
>>>> make it part of the
>>>> general body distributed by the vendors (who seem to follow our
>>>> "all" config).
>>>
>>> That begs the question, what do we mean by "all"? It currently
>>> excludes proxy and dav, as well as the modules you mention.
>>> That's IMHO rather more confusing than it should be.
>>>
>>
>> +1 :)
>
> +1 - there's only two classes of exceptions IMHO - those would be SSL,
> and pure test modules. And I'm +/-0 on including those test modules in
> 'all' (but never in 'most').
>
> My personal preference is that ANY production module, except for SSL, is
> automatically grabbed up with "all". So proxy and dav are mistakes IMHO.
+1 to this, but keep the test modules out of 'all'.
Regards
Rüdiger
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:07:40 +0100
>> Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it
>>> part of the 'all' setting
>>> in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap). And hence
>>> make it part of the
>>> general body distributed by the vendors (who seem to follow our
>>> "all" config).
>>
>> That begs the question, what do we mean by "all"? It currently
>> excludes proxy and dav, as well as the modules you mention.
>> That's IMHO rather more confusing than it should be.
>>
>
> +1 :)
+1 - there's only two classes of exceptions IMHO - those would be SSL,
and pure test modules. And I'm +/-0 on including those test modules in
'all' (but never in 'most').
My personal preference is that ANY production module, except for SSL, is
automatically grabbed up with "all". So proxy and dav are mistakes IMHO.
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Feb 8, 2008, at 12:01 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:07:40 +0100
> Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
>
>> Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it
>> part of the 'all' setting
>> in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap). And hence
>> make it part of the
>> general body distributed by the vendors (who seem to follow our
>> "all" config).
>
> That begs the question, what do we mean by "all"? It currently
> excludes proxy and dav, as well as the modules you mention.
> That's IMHO rather more confusing than it should be.
>
+1 :)
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Tony Stevenson <to...@pc-tony.com>.
Nick Kew wrote:
> That begs the question, what do we mean by "all"? It currently
> excludes proxy and dav, as well as the modules you mention.
> That's IMHO rather more confusing than it should be.
>
> However, we really do need to default to dynamic building if
> we're to include more modules in instant-brew-default configurations.
> As it stands, a default (static) "all" build gives you something
> quite insane.
>
>
We have tried to capture this confusion, on the wiki we have a page we
often redirect people too.
This often helps them build "all" modules, when that is what they
actually want to do.
http://wiki.apache.org/httpd/ConfigAllMods
Cheers,
Tony
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>.
On Feb 8, 2008, at 6:01 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:07:40 +0100
> Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
>
>> Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it
>> part of the 'all' setting
>> in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap). And hence
>> make it part of the
>> general body distributed by the vendors (who seem to follow our
>> "all" config).
>
> That begs the question, what do we mean by "all"? It currently
> excludes proxy and dav, as well as the modules you mention.
> That's IMHO rather more confusing than it should be.
I'd personally like the 'ALL' to be the things we generally expect to
be in a good/wide
build by, say, a vendor.
So that is everything but for experimental, debug and test modules.
With perhaps a special exception for 'ssl'.
> However, we really do need to default to dynamic building if
> we're to include more modules in instant-brew-default configurations.
> As it stands, a default (static) "all" build gives you something
> quite insane.
AFAIK the 'all' works for both static and dynamic.
>
>
>> I'd almost argue to make at least disk cache and normal cashe a
>> 'MOST'.
>
> Something to consider for 2.4, perhaps?
Aye - just for trunk for now.
Dw
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:07:40 +0100
Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org> wrote:
> Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it
> part of the 'all' setting
> in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap). And hence
> make it part of the
> general body distributed by the vendors (who seem to follow our
> "all" config).
That begs the question, what do we mean by "all"? It currently
excludes proxy and dav, as well as the modules you mention.
That's IMHO rather more confusing than it should be.
However, we really do need to default to dynamic building if
we're to include more modules in instant-brew-default configurations.
As it stands, a default (static) "all" build gives you something
quite insane.
> I'd almost argue to make at least disk cache and normal cashe a
> 'MOST'.
Something to consider for 2.4, perhaps?
--
Nick Kew
Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
http://www.apachetutor.org/
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
> Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>
>> Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it
>> part of the 'all' setting
>> in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap).
SSL has only been omitted from 'all' and requires explicit enable, simply
to protect those users crypto-encumbered jurisdictions.
Re: PATCH -- make the cache modules part of 'all'.
Posted by Graham Leggett <mi...@sharp.fm>.
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> Given that mod_cache is now quite mature - perhaps time to make it part
> of the 'all' setting
> in ./configure (and we could argue same for ssl and ldap). And hence
> make it part of the
> general body distributed by the vendors (who seem to follow our "all"
> config).
>
> I'd almost argue to make at least disk cache and normal cashe a 'MOST'.
+1.
Regards,
Graham
--