Mailing-List: contact bugs-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache HTTPD Bugs Notification List" <bugs@httpd.apache.org>
From: bugzilla@apache.org
To: bugs@httpd.apache.org
Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41111]  - New option for filters: run only if there
 are spare CPU cycles
In-Reply-To: <bug-41111-7868@http.issues.apache.org/bugzilla/>
Message-Id: <20061206202035.015B67142EC@brutus.apache.org>
Date: Wed,  6 Dec 2006 12:20:35 -0800 (PST)

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG�
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41111>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND�
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41111


------- Additional Comments From apache@harkless.org  2006-12-06 12:20 -------
Ah yes, I think I did see a reference to mod_load_average some time back when I
was researching Apache throttling options, but I'd forgotten about it.  Seems to
be undocumented and not supported by its author, though.  It's not featured with
his other modules on http://www.outoforder.cc/, for instance.

Sounds good to make this general-purpose for filters.

Thanks for the pointer to mod_cache.  It might be good to add a note about it to
the mod_deflate documentation, as it wouldn't necessarily be obvious to people
who aren't experts on Apache internals that it would cache output from
mod_deflate so it wouldn't have to be recompressed next time.  I was confused as
to how caching would work with mod_deflate (without having a separate caching
proxy instance) -- for instance, a lot of the stuff I read online (outside of
httpd.apache.org) about it claimed it did its *own* caching, but I couldn't find
any evidence of that in the documentation.

Yes, good point about "instantaneous CPU usage", a la 'top', being a misnomer,
since clearly it has to average over some time period to be meaningful -- it's
just a shorter time period than with load averages, without any extra factors
thrown in to the calculation, and expressed in terms of an easy to understand
0-100%, rather than load averages which can go arbitrarily high.  And yeah, I
hadn't really thought about this on Windows -- load averages would be even
harder to understand for Windows jockeys.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: bugs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: bugs-help@httpd.apache.org