httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Bloom <...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: ap_graceful_stop_signalled()
Date Thu, 02 Aug 2001 03:33:57 GMT

Wait a second, I'm confused.  Jeff, if I read your message correctly, you are
saying that you want to remove the ap_graceful_stop_signalled() function with
an ap_mpm_query call.  You don't want to add any new functionality, just change
how we determine what is going on.

Greg, you seem to be saying that we do need this ability.  We already have the 
ability, don't we?

As for changing the function, -0.5.  I don't care if we change the name of the
function, but this kind of thing doesn't belong in the ap_mpm_query function.
That function should be used to query information about the MPM, and the
current configuration.  It should not be used to track the state of the MPM.

Ryan

On Wednesday 01 August 2001 08:31, Greg Ames wrote:
> Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > All this seems to be used for is to see if we should accept another
> > request on a keepalive connection, so it seems fair to see if it can
> > be changed.
> >
> > There are reasons other than graceful restart why we wouldn't want to
> > accept another request:
> >
> > . MaxRequestsPerChild reached (a threaded MPM can reach that limit
> >   independent of what is happening on this connection)
> >
> > . some other sort of shutdown (yeah, graceless shouldn't care but we
> >   don't know how to knock out threads portably AFAIK; weird MPMs may
> >   have their own ideas about what to do)
> >
> > Why not replace ap_graceful_stop_signalled() with a call to
> > ap_mpm_query(), as in:
> >
> >   int mpm_exiting;
> >
> >   ap_mpm_query(AP_MPMQ_IS_EXITING, &mpm_exiting);
> >   if (mpm_exiting) {
> >     break;
> >   }
> >
> > or something more explicit like
> >
> >   AP_MPMQ_SHOULD_START_NEW_REQUEST      <- yeah, stupid name
>
> As I mentioned in the office yesterday, I think this is a good
> (necessary?) idea.  Consider what happens with an HTTP/1.1 proxy server
> front end, pipelining & multiplexing requests over a single connection
> to a back end server.  That connection could keep pumping requests
> forever, or at least until one of the servers dies.
>
> This also would stop the phenomenon that Cliff discovered when he used
> server-status?refresh=2 , which also pumps requests forever over a
> connection.  OTOH, it's a great way to hunt for bugs in p_i_s_m    8^)
>
> Greg

-- 

_____________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies			rbb@covalent.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mime
View raw message