httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: AW: Config Bug in proxy_balancer?
Date Tue, 28 Mar 2006 10:19:43 GMT
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Pl=FCm=2C_R=FCdiger=2C_VIS?= wrote:
> > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Jim Jagielski
> > > > to do here.
> > >=20
> > > Ok, but this actually works already without your patch.
> >=20
> > I never even bothered to check... Brian's initial
> > Email said that it didn't. Are you saying that his Email
> > is wrong and that balancers defined in the main server
> > conf via <Proxy>, as well as their workers, ARE fully
> > inherited by Vhosts?
> As far as I saw in my very limited tests: Yes.
> This does also match with my code analysis I did in one
> of my previous mails (the one with the 'correct me if I am wrong').
> Of course there remain other weird things that are not nice
> (e.g. the empty balancer created by the VHOST, the fact that the
> empty balancer is not used because it comes later in the array)

Then I'm confused on what the actual "problem" is then. And shame on
me for not trying to recreate the "bug" first before trying to
fix it :) We *do* after all merge and append the workers and
balancers. I just assumed that one issue was not creating
the balancer immediately and waiting for ProxyPass and/or
   Jim Jagielski   [|]   [|]
	    "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."

View raw message