httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm>
Subject Re: about those async filters
Date Thu, 08 Oct 2015 11:59:23 GMT
On 08 Oct 2015, at 1:45 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com> wrote:

> Yeah... it was 'always' foreseen that mod_h2/mod_http2 would provide
> useful clues on how to make 2.6/3.0 better, especially w/ the idea of
> slave connections; basically, as you say, let the MPM make mod_http2's
> job easier by abstracting out a lot of the tricks that mod_http2 needs
> to do to something that the MPMs themselves provide.
> 
> At that same time, however, was/is the need/desire to support http/2
> in 2.4.x (in fact, mod_h2 was *designed* w/ 2.4 in mind). So we are
> in this initial stage where what's in trunk isn't perfect for trunk
> (http/2-wise) but that's because it's really architectured for 2.4.
> 
> Once 2.4.17 is out, then I expect mod_http2 to start diverging between
> the trunk and 2.4 variants, as the version in trunk drives the MPM
> designs there, which correspondingly drives mod_http2 in trunk as well
> (ala a feedback loop). My goal was/is to make motorz "ideally" suited to
> support http2.

I don’t yet see a big necessity for diverging. So far the changes required have all been
backportable to the v2.4 series, and I believe we should continue to strive to do so until
we find we really can’t.

I am sensitive to our release cycles - on purpose, we don’t release minor releases often,
and that is a good thing. We want to ship something that is stable that people can deploy
and forget about, rather than something that changes out from underneath you every six months.

I don’t want to wait till v2.6 to get async behaviour, and I don’t believe we have to.
:)

Regards,
Graham
—


Mime
View raw message