httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Ames <>
Subject Re: How I Think Filters Should Work
Date Wed, 15 May 2002 16:52:30 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 05:18:42PM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > Let me be more precise. I'm not saying that we shouldn't use
> > brigades. What I'm saying is we shouldn't be dealing with specific types
> > of data at this level. Right now, by requiring a filter to request
> > "bytes" or "lines", we are seriously constraining the performance of
> > the filters. A filter should only inspect the types of the buckets it
> > retrieves and then move on. The bytes should only come in to play once
> > we have actually retrieved a bucket of a certain type that we are able
> > to process.
> I really think you're talking about a push-based filter system.
> However, it seems that there was a conscious decision to use
> pull for input-filters.  I wasn't around when that discussion
> was made.  I'd like to hear the rationale for using pull for
> input filters.
> > DATA (extra data read past headers)
> > EOS
> Sending metadata down is a big change.  Again, I *think* this was
> discussed before, but was determined that this wasn't the right way.
> I think we're going down a path that was discussed before.
> (As Manoj kidded me last night, you and I seem to retrace old
> discussions coming to the same conclusions Ryan and he did.)
> So, I think we need some of the old people to tell us why we
> aren't doing this.
> (If we do this for input filters, I think we need to do the
> same for output filters.)
> > around in my head for a long time. When they become clear enough I will
> > write up a more formal and concise proposal on how I think the future
> > filter system should work (possible for 2.1 or beyond). I think the
> > apr-serf project is a perfect place to play with some of these ideas. I
> > would appreciate any constructive comments to the above. ]
> I'm not sure I'm happy that so early in the 2.0 series that we're
> already concerned about the input filtering.  I don't think it's
> ever been "right" - probably because it was ignored for so long.
> It's showing now.  If this prevents people from writing good
> input filters, I think we need to fix this sooner rather than
> later.  -- justin

View raw message