httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacob Champion <>
Subject Re: FCGI_ABORT behavior in mod-proxy-fcgi
Date Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:51:54 GMT
On 01/11/2017 10:37 AM, Luca Toscano wrote:
> I still haven't found any good/clear motivation to send the FCGI_ABORT
> record (just before dropping the connection), but I am probably missing
> some good point or my assumptions could be wrong. Any comment or
> suggestion would be really welcome :)

My $0.02, copied from IRC for discussion on-list:

I don't think we should implement FCGI_ABORT until/unless we decide to 
implement FCGI multiplexing. I understand that the bug's OP is operating 
happily with an FCGI_ABORT patch, but until they respond to you to 
clarify what backend they're using, we don't know if their approach is 
correct even for their own use case.

I don't think we should send FCGI_ABORT and then immediately close the 
connection without waiting for the client to respond. In my mind, 
sending FCGI_ABORT is a contract: "we will accept and discard a 
reasonable number of messages for the current request ID while we wait 
for you to send FCGI_END_REQUEST".

I do think that closing the FCGI connection when the client closes 
theirs is valuable. Eric's suggestion on #httpd to hide this behind a 
directive is probably wise; we've broken enough FCGI backends recently...


View raw message