You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Jeff Trawick <tr...@gmail.com> on 2012/08/01 00:27:49 UTC
Re: Status of Windows-work for 2.4.x
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 4:11 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> On 7/18/2012 8:49 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Claudio Caldato (MS OPEN TECH)
>> <cl...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>> I have a dev available now so we are ready to start.
>>>
>>> I have been out of the loop for a while so I’ll start by looking at
>>> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52476, please point me to
>>> any other relevant information. And please add ‘Windows’ to the subject line
>>> for any Windows related issue so it will be easier for me to know which
>>> messages I have to read.
>>>
>>> I hope to have good news soon.
>>
>> Random question from the crowd...
>>
>> The WinNT MPM doesn't load the address of AcceptEx dynamically via
>> WSAIoctl, though that is a documented requirement and shown in the
>> AcceptEx sample I found.
>>
>> Is it possible that this results in flaky behavior depending on
>> third-party software installed?
>
> That is entirely possible but unlikely. The present flakey behavior is not
> surrounding AcceptEx(), it works for the vast majority of configurations
> until incomplete socket providers are added. But I'd be happy to see a patch
> to resolve AcceptEx dynamically.
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1363312
>
> The issues now are twofold;
>
> 1. When using AcceptEx() we always attempt to recycle the socket context.
> We should make this configurable and avoidable. Many socket providers
> have implemented AcceptEx() and then trash the socket making it fail
> any attempt at reuse.
>
> 2. When using accept() we are doing 'something wrong' compared to our 2.2
> code, which causes the timeouts to be other than expected by APR. This
> in turn causes the mod_ssl blocking read to fail to block.
>
>
--
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
http://emptyhammock.com/
Re: Status of Windows-work for 2.4.x
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 7/31/2012 3:27 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 4:11 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
> <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>> On 7/18/2012 8:49 AM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Claudio Caldato (MS OPEN TECH)
>>> <cl...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>> I have a dev available now so we are ready to start.
>>>>
>>>> I have been out of the loop for a while so I’ll start by looking at
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52476, please point me to
>>>> any other relevant information. And please add ‘Windows’ to the subject line
>>>> for any Windows related issue so it will be easier for me to know which
>>>> messages I have to read.
>>>>
>>>> I hope to have good news soon.
>>>
>>> Random question from the crowd...
>>>
>>> The WinNT MPM doesn't load the address of AcceptEx dynamically via
>>> WSAIoctl, though that is a documented requirement and shown in the
>>> AcceptEx sample I found.
>>>
>>> Is it possible that this results in flaky behavior depending on
>>> third-party software installed?
>>
>> That is entirely possible but unlikely. The present flakey behavior is not
>> surrounding AcceptEx(), it works for the vast majority of configurations
>> until incomplete socket providers are added. But I'd be happy to see a patch
>> to resolve AcceptEx dynamically.
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1363312
Looks great! Thanks for the patch :)