Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 23:40:38 -0700
From: Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@apache.org>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL]: Bytes received v. mod_log_config
Message-ID: <20020819064038.GK10266@apache.org>
Mail-Followup-To: Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@apache.org>,
	dev@httpd.apache.org
References: <1029709553.1180.19.camel@beast.rexursive.com>
 <20020819040049.GD10266@apache.org>
 <1029731260.3d6073bc668b7@imp.rexursive.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1029731260.3d6073bc668b7@imp.rexursive.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 02:27:40PM +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> Thanks for the hint! I never thought of that... Since a filter like that is
> connection based, I'm not sure (mainly because I don't know much about Apache)
> how would that work with persistent connections, chunked encoding and other
> cross connection complications in regards to reporting the info per request. Or
> would that just 'automagic' from the filter's point of view? If I take that
> route, I'll have to do a bit of digging ;-)

The trick is that recently someone (forget who) fixed up the filters
so that a connection-level filter always has a reference to the
'current' request.

So, even in a connection-level filter, filter_rec->r should be valid.
You'd have to determine some place to store how much we read, but
that could be done in a mod_log_config private structure.

Hope this makes some sense.  -- justin