Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 20903 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2011 13:14:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 25 Mar 2011 13:14:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 49552 invoked by uid 500); 25 Mar 2011 13:14:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 49523 invoked by uid 500); 25 Mar 2011 13:14:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 49515 invoked by uid 99); 25 Mar 2011 13:14:07 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 13:14:07 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of bchesneau@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.180 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.210.180] (HELO mail-iy0-f180.google.com) (209.85.210.180) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 13:14:01 +0000 Received: by iyf40 with SMTP id 40so1536259iyf.11 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:13:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FVaqOtDPqrt6k8MaLXegmUGwCzyFhR4SbBTDy3lMztM=; b=MIaHGYY57jfWk7WCGkwuPYyfFLo+3smDRqPiheHaflqoxSVqO6aMsMnqlRyW+VTySf fg2NuUUU6el78b+hyd0CvJGxOGCJjzOW5SPHBbFmVxX6PMs2/58KcPcI+aF2vFtBdhIo UhakOXgD67GcmCJtSQtFMxMDuWTvCRZfEN/S4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=KNhMS9vqXzm5/j5No+u8ciKiN3poWciKBnU596iN0gFkZD+KLruGJNTTGMrTr9gkA5 2gtBSbOyHTf3Wubdd2T5hDsev8St91N4Kvq9DRQdtwKRGZkJ1O4KMS5J+xZcbq1ybBgg 6tzD5LuxoSjUaZQ3Cm/pXYs3lpBLvdSpEKgPc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.43.61.20 with SMTP id wu20mr1236909icb.371.1301058820591; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:13:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.10.200 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:13:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <82D29B2A-7F02-45E2-B1A6-99E8FBEC4BEE@apache.org> References: <82D29B2A-7F02-45E2-B1A6-99E8FBEC4BEE@apache.org> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:13:40 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 160- failure From: Benoit Chesneau To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > Good find Benoit! > > On 25 Mar 2011, at 11:01, Benoit Chesneau wrote: > >> Frome time to time the 160- etap test is failing (depending on the >> platform or whatever). While chasing this issue I noticed that >> returning values from couch_config:get inserted via couch_config:set >> aren't in the right order: > > When designing the config system way back when I went with the assumption > that order of sections or values in sections is not specified. I.e. Couch= DB > is behaving as "specified" (but I don't think I ever wrote that down). sound normal. Thinking more about it I can't remember an example of ini where order counts. > > It sounds like the wildcard vhosts rely on a specific ordering, is that > correct? In that case, I don't have any problems guaranteeing the order > of values within sections (but I wouldn't go so far as to define an order > for sections themselves). Sections that are spread over multiple config > files should take the order of when the subsequent files are parsed. I.e. > Section X in file A and B orders its entries as all from file A and then > from file B, if they are parsed in order. > > I'm fairly certain that the ini parser and writer also do not preserve > ordering, which we'd have to look after. Yes current vhosts rules like the rewriter are relying on the order. It sounds really complicated to have this working with multiple ini almost impossible, except if they are prefixed I think > > Alternatively, can we make wildcard-vhosts not rely on the total ordering > of config values? It's easier to do. What doesn't work actually is the variable replacement. I propose to remove these replacements and just use host wildcard, simple path and host name. No wildcards in path. If we are OK with that, I can attach the patch to jira during the we. > > Cheers > Jan > -- > PS: all the example urls in the previous mails in this mark this one as > =A0 =A0spam for me, so I removed the previous trace. >