You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Sander van Zoest <sa...@vanzoest.com> on 2009/12/30 01:04:35 UTC
Re: todos for 2.3.1-alpha
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Takashi Sato <ta...@lans-tv.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:27:11 -0800
> Paul Querna <ch...@force-elite.com> wrote:
>
> > Anything else anyone thinks would be good to get in?
>
> How about increasing worker_score::request?
> This was originally proposed in Oct 2007.
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200710.mbox/%3CPine.GSO.4.64.0710201228590.22218@kleopatra.acc.umu.se%3E
>
>
Hi,
I know this is an old topic, but I just ran into this again. Any chance we
could see something like this make it in the 2.3.X branch? I did not see a
reply on this.
--
Sander van Zoest
Re: todos for 2.3.1-alpha
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Evan Champion wrote:
>
> On a slight tangent, the status (in 2.2 at least) does not include the server port number. The vhost name is fine for name-based vhosts, but we need the port number to make sense of the status for port-based vhosts. Can the port be included along with the vhost name (e.g. vhostname:port notation)?
Might be a tangent, but ++1 to fix while we revisit the status record!
RE: todos for 2.3.1-alpha
Posted by Evan Champion <ev...@nortel.com>.
Hi,
On a slight tangent, the status (in 2.2 at least) does not include the server port number. The vhost name is fine for name-based vhosts, but we need the port number to make sense of the status for port-based vhosts. Can the port be included along with the vhost name (e.g. vhostname:port notation)?
Thanks,
Evan
-----Original Message-----
From: William A. Rowe Jr. [mailto:wrowe@rowe-clan.net]
Sent: Wednesday, 30 December 2009 10:08
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: todos for 2.3.1-alpha
Sander van Zoest wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Takashi Sato <takashi@lans-tv.com
> <ma...@lans-tv.com>> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:27:11 -0800
> Paul Querna <chip@force-elite.com <ma...@force-elite.com>> wrote:
>
> > Anything else anyone thinks would be good to get in?
>
> How about increasing worker_score::request?
> This was originally proposed in Oct 2007.
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200710.mbox/%3CPine.GSO.4.64.0710201228590.22218@kleopatra.acc.umu.se%3E
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I know this is an old topic, but I just ran into this again. Any chance
> we could see something like this make it in the 2.3.X branch? I did not
> see a reply on this.
Wouldn't it make sense to pack multi-ascii fields in a single text block?
Folks rarely use the entire 64 characters of the remote machine or vhost name.
Re: todos for 2.3.1-alpha
Posted by Sander van Zoest <sa...@vanzoest.com>.
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 2:20 AM, Niklas Edmundsson <ni...@acc.umu.se> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>
> How about increasing worker_score::request?
>>> This was originally proposed in Oct 2007.
>>>
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200710.mbox/%3CPine.GSO.4.64.0710201228590.22218@kleopatra.acc.umu.se%3E
>>>
>>> I know this is an old topic, but I just ran into this again. Any chance
>>> we could see something like this make it in the 2.3.X branch? I did not
>>> see a reply on this.
>>>
>>
>> Wouldn't it make sense to pack multi-ascii fields in a single text block?
>> Folks rarely use the entire 64 characters of the remote machine or vhost
>> name.
>>
>
> It probably would, although I suspect that it would break quite a few
> modules, or? If we want to do that now's the time though.
>
I think most modules worked around the scoreboard limitations, so likely
would not see any impact.
However, I still think that increasing the thing from 64 to 256 bytes would
> solve most peoples problems without taxing memory too much. If noone has the
> time to do the elegant fix, I would opt for at least doing the easy kludge
> for now...
>
Right and most modules that would make use of this seem to have gone the
route of doing their own accounting by hooking into log transaction hook and
storing that data out of bound.
None of mod_telemetry, mod_bw, etc. seem to share this data and almost all
duplicate the
scoreboard data. It is understandable that they all need a place to store
their specific accounting details, but you'd hope they would be able to
reuse and key off of the scoreboard for things in common. Instrumenting and
monitoring solutions also could use access to this data.
Ideally we would provide r->notes type functionality for modules to use in
respect of the scoreboard while storing the same size fields of request_rec
that are commonly used by all these types of modules.
-- Sander
Re: todos for 2.3.1-alpha
Posted by Niklas Edmundsson <ni...@acc.umu.se>.
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>> How about increasing worker_score::request?
>> This was originally proposed in Oct 2007.
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200710.mbox/%3CPine.GSO.4.64.0710201228590.22218@kleopatra.acc.umu.se%3E
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I know this is an old topic, but I just ran into this again. Any chance
>> we could see something like this make it in the 2.3.X branch? I did not
>> see a reply on this.
>
> Wouldn't it make sense to pack multi-ascii fields in a single text block?
> Folks rarely use the entire 64 characters of the remote machine or vhost name.
It probably would, although I suspect that it would break quite a few
modules, or? If we want to do that now's the time though.
However, I still think that increasing the thing from 64 to 256 bytes
would solve most peoples problems without taxing memory too much. If
noone has the time to do the elegant fix, I would opt for at least
doing the easy kludge for now...
/Nikke
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Niklas Edmundsson, Admin @ {acc,hpc2n}.umu.se | nikke@acc.umu.se
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MULTITASK: Choke on gum and trip simultaniously!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Re: todos for 2.3.1-alpha
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Sander van Zoest wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Takashi Sato <takashi@lans-tv.com
> <ma...@lans-tv.com>> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:27:11 -0800
> Paul Querna <chip@force-elite.com <ma...@force-elite.com>> wrote:
>
> > Anything else anyone thinks would be good to get in?
>
> How about increasing worker_score::request?
> This was originally proposed in Oct 2007.
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-dev/200710.mbox/%3CPine.GSO.4.64.0710201228590.22218@kleopatra.acc.umu.se%3E
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I know this is an old topic, but I just ran into this again. Any chance
> we could see something like this make it in the 2.3.X branch? I did not
> see a reply on this.
Wouldn't it make sense to pack multi-ascii fields in a single text block?
Folks rarely use the entire 64 characters of the remote machine or vhost name.