httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ruediger Pluem <>
Subject Re: 2.2.10 T&R on Oct 7
Date Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:34:45 GMT

On 10/06/2008 10:18 PM, Greg Ames wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Ruediger Pluem <> wrote:
>> On 10/06/2008 04:42 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> Subj says it all...
>> Thanks for doing RM Jim. So c'mon guys. There must be someone
>> out there that reviews the remaining patch that misses only
>> *one* vote.
> what do I need for a minimal config to test it and see a behavior change?  I
> tried this, proxying to a different port on the same server, but couldn't
> get the back end connections to stay alive for more than a few seconds with
> the old code.
> <Proxy balancer://mycluster>
> BalancerMember http://localhost:8093 keepalive=on smax=2 ttl=1
> </Proxy>
> ProxyPass /proxy balancer://mycluster/

Thanks for reviewing. First of all I guess you should increase the KeepAliveTimeout
to a large value like 5 minutes to make observations easier. Furthermore I would increase
the ttl parameter of your BalancerMember to something like 30.
The above configuration makes only sense if you are using a threaded MPM like worker / event
with more than 2 threads per process.
Then start your httpd with a limitation to one process (-X or ServerLimit 1) and try to do
3 requests to /proxy in parallel e.g. with telnet or nc. Afterwards you should
have 3 backend connections of which one should vanish about 30 seconds after your requests.



View raw message