Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACsi251Bb=XBeZMsPyWHNfMzDUXfeXazQPhy18Kh8mntAvk1vA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6EBDDE61-D022-4DD5-841A-9B388D190B9A@jaguNET.com>
 <366E003D-1495-405B-9D58-90AFA8FDC1C8@jaguNET.com> <DA61143B-97F6-4FD0-B752-86F03D905A91@jaguNET.com>
 <CACsi251Bb=XBeZMsPyWHNfMzDUXfeXazQPhy18Kh8mntAvk1vA@mail.gmail.com>
From: William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 09:15:50 -0500
Message-ID: <CACsi252Oge08XWYtL2q27hA9nhmKU7Vhukx6Em5Wsst+EL_niw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: T&R 2.4.23 tomorrow (Thurs) ??
To: httpd <dev@httpd.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f62d22c047605365746ae
archived-at: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 14:15:57 -0000

--001a113f62d22c047605365746ae
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:46 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wrowe@rowe-clan.net>
wrote:

>
> I suppose this would have been the more accurate toggle, in the first
> place?
> Any reason we would build lbmethods without balancer?
>
>   enable_lbmethod_byrequests=$enable_proxy_balancer
>   enable_lbmethod_bytraffic=$enable_proxy_balancer
>   enable_lbmethod_bybusyness=$enable_proxy_balancer
>   enable_lbmethod_heartbeat=$enable_proxy_balancer
>
> Patch committed to trunk, r1750507, to depend-on proxy_balancer
> and to use it's build flag as our default (static/shared or 'yes')
>

Also, in one case...

APACHE_MODULE(lbmethod_heartbeat, Apache proxy Load balancing from
Heartbeats, , , $enable_proxy_balancer, , proxy_balancer)

Wouldn't this depend on both [proxy_balancer,heartmonitor] (using the
new multiple-dependency syntax)?

--001a113f62d22c047605365746ae
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On T=
ue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:46 AM, William A Rowe Jr <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a hre=
f=3D"mailto:wrowe@rowe-clan.net" target=3D"_blank">wrowe@rowe-clan.net</a>&=
gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px =
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-col=
or:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_=
extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div><br></div><div>I suppose this would =
have been the more accurate toggle, in the first place?</div><div>Any reaso=
n we would build lbmethods without balancer?</div><div><br></div><div>=C2=
=A0 enable_lbmethod_byrequests=3D$enable_proxy_balancer</div><div>=C2=A0 en=
able_lbmethod_bytraffic=3D$enable_proxy_balancer</div><div>=C2=A0 enable_lb=
method_bybusyness=3D$enable_proxy_balancer</div><div>=C2=A0 enable_lbmethod=
_heartbeat=3D$enable_proxy_balancer</div><div>=C2=A0</div><div>Patch commit=
ted to trunk, r1750507, to depend-on proxy_balancer</div><div>and to use it=
&#39;s build flag as our default (static/shared or &#39;yes&#39;)</div></di=
v></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Also, in one case...</div><d=
iv><br></div><div><div>APACHE_MODULE(lbmethod_heartbeat, Apache proxy Load =
balancing from Heartbeats, , , $enable_proxy_balancer, , proxy_balancer)</d=
iv></div><div><br></div><div>Wouldn&#39;t this depend on both [proxy_balanc=
er,heartmonitor] (using the</div><div>new multiple-dependency syntax)?</div=
><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div>

--001a113f62d22c047605365746ae--