Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2)
In-Reply-To: <43BD7A9C.5060907@apache.org>
References: <8EEEDC0F-634E-459E-89EA-AC872326E3AA@jaguNET.com>
 <43A58749.3070903@apache.org>
 <FEB77F78-B64E-477D-93C5-0D2906DC204C@jaguNET.com>
 <43A5DED4.7060709@apache.org>
 <72A5F4B7-BB0B-485F-9983-F6AD0CBC73C2@jaguNET.com>
 <43A86651.9080004@turner.com> <43A87423.9000504@apache.org>
 <43B9989B.4070207@apache.org>
 <99EBAA88-116D-4757-A554-147A478CF0D8@apache.org> <43BD0789.80701@apache.org>
 <20060105115827.GA26479@redhat.com> <43BD1640.5050603@apache.org>
 <43BD7A9C.5060907@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <65841636-BDB3-4639-9FFD-09FE08A14AC3@jaguNET.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com>
Subject: Re: AW: AW: AW: 2.2 mod_http_proxy and "partial" pages
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2006 13:47:58 -0500
To: dev@httpd.apache.org

Still not sure why you are using a specific error detection
filter rather than the generic one in -trunk

On Jan 5, 2006, at 2:59 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:

> @@ -146,13 +162,20 @@
>           *   2) the trailer
>           *   3) the end-of-chunked body CRLF
>           *
> -         * If there is no EOS bucket, then do nothing.
> +         * If there is no EOS bucket, or if we had seen an error  
> bucket with
> +         * status HTTP_BAD_GATEWAY then do nothing. We have  
> memorized an
> +         * error bucket that we had seen in the filter context.
> +         * The error bucket with status HTTP_BAD_GATEWAY indicates  
> that the
> +         * connection to the backend (mod_proxy) broke in the  
> middle of the
> +         * response. In order to signal the client that something  
> went wrong
> +         * we do not create the last-chunk marker and set c- 
> >keepalive to
> +         * AP_CONN_CLOSE in the core output filter.
>           *
>           * XXX: it would be nice to combine this with the end-of- 
> chunk
>           * marker above, but this is a bit more straight-forward for
>           * now.
>           */
> -        if (eos != NULL) {
> +        if (eos && !f->ctx) {

Code logic doesn't match comment.

> +    /*
> +     * Ensure that we sent an EOS bucket thru the filter chain, if  
> we already
> +     * have sent some data. Maybe ap_proxy_backend_broke was  
> called and added
> +     * one to the brigade already. So we should not do this in  
> this case.
> +     */
> +    if (data_sent && !r->eos_sent && APR_BRIGADE_EMPTY 
> (output_brigade)) {
> +        e = apr_bucket_eos_create(r->connection->bucket_alloc);
> +        APR_BRIGADE_INSERT_TAIL(output_brigade, e);
> +    }
> +
>

Also, if data_sent is true, then ap_proxy_backend_broke() already
sent the EOS, so why are we checking if it's true again? I
think the logic is wrong...