httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: [VOTE] ap_r* model.
Date Fri, 02 Mar 2001 15:19:15 GMT
From: <rbb@covalent.net>
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 9:04 AM


> I think I remember gstein writing...
>
> > happen", but can only happen by a deliberate action of a module author. They
> > have to take special measures to get themselves in front of OLD_WRITE. We
> > don't have to take precautions against deliberate troublemakers; there are
> > too many other ways that a module author can screw things up.
> 
> The problem isn't me as a module author, it is the other guy.  My module
> may be fine, but what if there is another module that isn't.

Here's the upshot.

OLD_WRITE filter can be blown away not paying attention to filter ordering.

r->bb can be blown away by anyone not paying attention to the request's own brigade.

Which of these is harder to debug ?!?  Harder to document ?!?  That's the key!

[We aren't talking about buckets here guys... the -brigade- is that stream that
is sent down the filter stack.  I have yet to be convinced we need more than one 
per request.  As FirstBill and rbb point out, you just keep adding to it.]

I see ordering problems as the hardest headache to debug.  r->bb misordering is
fairly straightforward - if you start misordering, the module _author_ messed up.
If you have a filtering problem, the user will have some impact on filter ordering.
That means they can create a problem.  If it's a choice between the module author
and the end user creating bugs, I'll take the author's bugs any day.

Bill



Mime
View raw message