httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: [PATCH] <Location > block speed up
Date Fri, 16 Jan 2004 22:47:34 GMT
Geoffrey Young wrote:
> Bill Stoddard wrote:

>>My not so well formed thoughts are that if a module claims it should
>>handle a request based on a SetHandler directive in a Location
>>directive, the server should not allow that handler to DECLINE the
>>request. Putting it another way, if the handler claims the request then
>>DECLINEs, the server should prevent other handlers from attempting to
>>serve the request.
> I've brought this up before, but if you shortcut translation, how do you
> handle cases where r->handler is set after translation/map_to_storage.

I'd rather keep it simple and not change how those cases are processed.

> that is, just because at the start of a request <Location /foo> refers to a
> non-static resource, doesn't mean that assumption won't change.

<Location /foo> wasn't intended to be used for static files.  See  If somebody wants to 
do something that strange, they can write their own map_to_storage function.

> wrote:
>>A map_to_storage hook needs to know when to allow the directory walk and
>>when not to.
> I think I see what you mean.  so, perhaps the answer to my question above is
> that, with your patch, if modules expect to set r->handler under certain
> conditions, then they ought to install their own map_to_storage handler to
> handle those conditions as well?

yeah, that's my take.  If the module is sophisticated enough to know when to set 
r->handler without the core's help, I would assume it's sophisticated enough to 
have a custom map_to_storage function which knows when it is appropriate to 
alter normal processing.


View raw message