Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 23:38:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dean Gaudet <dgaudet@arctic.org>
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ETags and Last-Modified, take 3
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970829140400.13170A-100000@veal.organic.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95dg3.970901233748.31652R-100000@twinlark.arctic.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org


On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Alexei Kosut wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Aug 1997, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> 
> >     One thing I'm not sure about is how to handle a script that
> >     sent headers that *didn't* meet the conditions.  At the moment
> >     I'm treating it the same way as one which generated bogus headers
> >     (i.e., slurp up all the output and return the error), but I could
> >     see a long-running script turning this into a time-sink.  Should
> >     maybe the script be killed?  Except I can see potential negative
> >     side-effects from that, too..  Perhaps the kill_timeout() should be
> >     moved to *after* the slurp..?
> 
> I don't think the script should be killed (some CGI scripts will do
> important things during/after sending an entity). Maybe send it a SIGURG or
> some other non-terminal signal, to tell it "hey, stop it, I'm not sending
> anything anymore"?

It is killed off without reading anything if a HEAD request is performed. 
This is essentially the same ... isn't it?  I'll look at the patch later.

Dean