httpd-apreq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <>
Subject Re: dev question: apreq 2 as a filter?
Date Thu, 22 Aug 2002 03:26:30 GMT
Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Stas Bekman <> writes:

>>As mentioned before, I'd rather wait before httpd-dev decides how they
>>want apreq to be in order to accept it.
> Agreed, but I don't think it hurts anything to *discuss* potential
> implications of a filter based approach.  

Of course ;)

> FWIW, I think filters
> are a non-starter if it means that a +100MB file upload will balloon
> the httpd process size by +100MB.

Meaning that ideally it should be hookable both ways, the old way and as 
a filter. If we have that, we aren't restricted in exploring the filter 
option while having the knowingly working "normal" interface.

Plus it will probably need to be more configurable. For example if 
acting as a filter, we may need an option to suck the body-in or copy 
it. And be able to limit the body size like we do now to avoid DOS attacks.

p.s. As you can see on the httpd-dev list, so far more reaction was 
generated regading the silly macro which is a one-sec fix, rather than 
the much bigger issue we are trying to resolve here.

Stas Bekman            JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker     mod_perl Guide --->

View raw message