Mailing List Archive: Apache: Dev

adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk?

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

sf at sfritsch

Oct 4, 2009, 1:23 AM

Post #1 of 13 (736 views)
Permalink

adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk?

Hi,

I would like to add mod_reqtimeout [1,2] to trunk. Is this OK?

Considering the positive comments it received, may I put it into
modules/filter or should it go into modules/experimental first?

Cheers,
Stefan

[1] http://www.sfritsch.de/mod_reqtimeout/mod_reqtimeout.c
[2] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-
dev/200908.mbox/<200909010043.54040.sf [at] sfritsch>

rainer.jung at kippdata

Oct 4, 2009, 1:56 AM

Post #2 of 13 (699 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

On 04.10.2009 10:23, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to add mod_reqtimeout [1,2] to trunk. Is this OK?

I think it would be a useful addition.

Regards,

Rainer

rpluem at apache

Oct 4, 2009, 2:15 AM

Post #3 of 13 (705 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

On 10/04/2009 10:23 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to add mod_reqtimeout [1,2] to trunk. Is this OK?
>
> Considering the positive comments it received, may I put it into
> modules/filter or should it go into modules/experimental first?

I guess experimental is a good starting point.

Regards

Rüdiger

margol at beamartyr

Oct 4, 2009, 2:52 AM

Post #4 of 13 (692 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

+1

Rainer Jung wrote:
> On 04.10.2009 10:23, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to add mod_reqtimeout [1,2] to trunk. Is this OK?
>>
>
> I think it would be a useful addition.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rainer
>

nick at webthing

Oct 4, 2009, 4:15 AM

Post #5 of 13 (695 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

On 4 Oct 2009, at 09:23, Stefan Fritsch wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to add mod_reqtimeout [1,2] to trunk. Is this OK?
>
> Considering the positive comments it received, may I put it into
> modules/filter or should it go into modules/experimental first?

"experimental" has been somewhat in limbo of late: there was some
discussion on here that led to it no longer being used.

I don't recollect why, but if you use it for mod_reqtimeout, there are
quite a number of other new modules that should join it there:
in fact probably most of what's new in trunk over 2.2.

--
Nick Ke

jim at jaguNET

Oct 4, 2009, 9:27 AM

Post #6 of 13 (682 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

Personally, I'd like to see this as part of the actual
code core, where we have several Timeouts, eg:

Timeout 30 5 10 2

which define timeout as now, timeout before 1st byte, timeout
between bytes timeout after etc...

We've always wanted better control over this ind timeouts and
putting it in a module seems not a good idea for 2.4/3.0
(but of course, OK for 2.2.x)

On Oct 4, 2009, at 4:23 AM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would like to add mod_reqtimeout [1,2] to trunk. Is this OK?
>
> Considering the positive comments it received, may I put it into
> modules/filter or should it go into modules/experimental first?
>
> Cheers,
> Stefan
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.sfritsch.de/mod_reqtimeout/mod_reqtimeout.c
> [2] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/httpd-
> dev/200908.mbox/<200909010043.54040.sf [at] sfritsch>
>

sf at sfritsch

Oct 4, 2009, 11:38 AM

Post #7 of 13 (686 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

On Sunday 04 October 2009, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Personally, I'd like to see this as part of the actual
> code core, where we have several Timeouts, eg:
>
> Timeout 30 5 10 2
>
> which define timeout as now, timeout before 1st byte, timeout
> between bytes timeout after etc...
>
> We've always wanted better control over this ind timeouts and
> putting it in a module seems not a good idea for 2.4/3.0
> (but of course, OK for 2.2.x)
>

I think putting mod_reqtimeout into trunk until it is backported to
2.2 and then moving it into the core would make sense, wouldn't it?

And I would prefer several config directives instead of having to
remember which value in Timeout means what.

jim at jaguNET

Oct 4, 2009, 11:45 AM

Post #8 of 13 (689 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

On Oct 4, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:

> On Sunday 04 October 2009, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Personally, I'd like to see this as part of the actual
>> code core, where we have several Timeouts, eg:
>>
>> Timeout 30 5 10 2
>>
>> which define timeout as now, timeout before 1st byte, timeout
>> between bytes timeout after etc...
>>
>> We've always wanted better control over this ind timeouts and
>> putting it in a module seems not a good idea for 2.4/3.0
>> (but of course, OK for 2.2.x)
>>
>
> I think putting mod_reqtimeout into trunk until it is backported to
> 2.2 and then moving it into the core would make sense, wouldn't it?
>

+1

> And I would prefer several config directives instead of having to
> remember which value in Timeout means what.
>

Well, I'm not a big fan of directive creep, but I see your point
and agree with it in a general sense.

FWIW, IMO it should go in modules/filters not experimental.

nick at webthing

Oct 4, 2009, 11:53 AM

Post #9 of 13 (693 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

Jim Jagielski wrote:

>> And I would prefer several config directives instead of having to
>> remember which value in Timeout means what.
>>
>
> Well, I'm not a big fan of directive creep, but I see your point
> and agree with it in a general sense.

Timeout Thistimeout=10 Thattimeout=2 Othertimeout=300 ?

We have precedent for this kind of halfway house.

> FWIW, IMO it should go in modules/filters not experimental.

+1. /trunk/ is, by definition, experimental. But when we
float off 2.3/4-branch, we should perhaps do some documentation
of stability levels of different features and modules for users.
I might open a wiki page to collect information on the subject.

--
Nick Kew

wrowe at rowe-clan

Oct 4, 2009, 12:14 PM

Post #10 of 13 (686 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Oct 4, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
>
>> On Sunday 04 October 2009, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> Personally, I'd like to see this as part of the actual
>>> code core, where we have several Timeouts, eg:
>>>
>>> Timeout 30 5 10 2
>>>
>>> which define timeout as now, timeout before 1st byte, timeout
>>> between bytes timeout after etc...

>> And I would prefer several config directives instead of having to
>> remember which value in Timeout means what.
>>
>
> Well, I'm not a big fan of directive creep, but I see your point
> and agree with it in a general sense.

I agree with Stefan, "30 5 10 2" is nonsensical to the casual administrator.

But going to your point, Jim, perhaps using some sort of Timeout keepalive=5
syntax might be good?

Directives are in a hash, and only evaluated for .htaccess at runtime, so it's
not the place to focus our optimization energies.

sf at sfritsch

Oct 4, 2009, 12:40 PM

Post #11 of 13 (684 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

On Sunday 04 October 2009, Nick Kew wrote:
> > FWIW, IMO it should go in modules/filters not experimental.
>
> +1. trunk is, by definition, experimental. But when we
> float off 2.3/4-branch, we should perhaps do some documentation
> of stability levels of different features and modules for users.
> I might open a wiki page to collect information on the subject.
>

I agree and would rather reserve modules/experimental for modules that
have known issues.

I have commited mod_reqtimeout to trunk. I haven't finished the docs,
yet.

jim at jaguNET

Oct 5, 2009, 6:24 AM

Post #12 of 13 (683 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

Thx... I'm updating it with an eye to making it core, and
therefore having ReqTimeout headerinit=5 headermax=10 ....

Let me know if I can help w/ the docs.

On Oct 4, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:

> On Sunday 04 October 2009, Nick Kew wrote:
>>> FWIW, IMO it should go in modules/filters not experimental.
>>
>> +1. trunk is, by definition, experimental. But when we
>> float off 2.3/4-branch, we should perhaps do some documentation
>> of stability levels of different features and modules for users.
>> I might open a wiki page to collect information on the subject.
>>
>
> I agree and would rather reserve modules/experimental for modules that
> have known issues.
>
> I have commited mod_reqtimeout to trunk. I haven't finished the docs,
> yet.
>

sf at sfritsch

Oct 6, 2009, 2:33 PM

Post #13 of 13 (674 views)
Permalink

Re: adding mod_reqtimeout to trunk? [In reply to]

On Monday 05 October 2009, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Thx... I'm updating it with an eye to making it core, and
> therefore having ReqTimeout headerinit=5 headermax=10 ....

As we also have RequestHeaders, maybe RequestTimeout would be better?

> Let me know if I can help w/ the docs.

I have commited some docs. Any improvements are welcome.

BTW, how will the timeouts interact with SSL renegotiation and with
mod_request? I haven't tried that yet.

Cheers,
Stefan

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads