httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group" <ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com>
Subject RE: errors that cause proxy to move worker to error state
Date Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:28:49 GMT
 


________________________________

	From: Jeff Trawick [mailto:trawick@gmail.com] 
	Sent: Dienstag, 31. August 2010 16:25
	To: dev@httpd.apache.org
	Subject: Re: errors that cause proxy to move worker to error state
	
	
	On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Rainer Jung <rainer.jung@kippdata.de> wrote:
	

		On 31.08.2010 15:44, Jeff Trawick wrote:
		

			On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:40 AM, "Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group"
			
			<ruediger.pluem@vodafone.com <mailto:ruediger.pluem@vodafone.com>> wrote:
			
			   A 400 does not mean that the backend is not available.
			
			
			agreed
			
			   It just means that
			   a bad request was sent.
			
			
			I don't like that part ;)   Maybe mod_proxy mangled what got sent (sent
			too much body on prior request?).
			


		So that could result in "close this backend connection" not "put into error state" as a
reaction, right?
		


	Yes (I forgot or didn't know the distinction between closing a particular connection and
marking the worker in error)

	At present we don't mark particular connections for close just based on the status code without
marking the worker in error, right?

	Anyway, my question should have been

	"Should we close backend connections if we get 400?" 
	 
	Seems reasonable at least for mod_proxy_http to avoid further possible harm on that connection.
	 
	Regards
	 
	Rüdiger
	 

	 


Mime
View raw message