modperl-mod_accel_and_reverse_proxying_etc

This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.



To: Philip Mak <pmak@animeglobe.com>
From: Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
Subject: Re: mod_accel reverse proxying?
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 10:55:52 +0300 (MSK)

On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Philip Mak wrote:

> Does mod_accel have a reverse proxying directive (similar to the
> ProxyPassReverse directive in mod_proxy) in order to make redirects work?

Yes, AccelPass automatically handles reverse proxying in
"Location" and "Refresh" headers.

> I believe the "AccelPass" directive automatically handles reverse
> proxying, but what if I used RewriteRule instead:
> 
> RewriteRule ^(.*)\.asp$ http://127.0.0.1:8001/$1.asp [L,P]
> 
> That does not setup reverse proxying for me...

Yes, it doesn't. It's difficult to figure proxied URL parts in mod_rewrite
so I have to make explicit directive to specify reverse rewrite.
I will make it today or tomorrow.
I think it should have reverse syntax:

AccelReverse  http://127.0.0.1:8001/   /

Or not ? Of course it complicates porting from mod_proxy to mod_accel
but I think it's clearer then ProxyPassReverse syntax.

===
To: Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
From: Philip Mak <pmak@animeglobe.com>
Subject: Re: mod_accel reverse proxying?
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 03:06:11 -0500 (EST)

On Fri, 28 Dec 2001, Igor Sysoev wrote:

> Yes, it doesn't. It's difficult to figure proxied URL parts in mod_rewrite
> so I have to make explicit directive to specify reverse rewrite.
> I will make it today or tomorrow.

Great!

> I think it should have reverse syntax:
>
> AccelReverse  http://127.0.0.1:8001/   /
>
> Or not ? Of course it complicates porting from mod_proxy to mod_accel
> but I think it's clearer then ProxyPassReverse syntax.

I don't think either order is more clearer than the other, but since
ProxyPassReverse has it like / http://127.0.0.1:8001/, my personal opinion
is that AccelPassReverse should have it in the same order too to avoid
confusion.

===
To: "Philip Mak" <pmak@animeglobe.com>, "Igor Sysoev"
<is@rambler-co.ru>
From: "Jeremy Howard" <jh_lists@fastmail.fm>
Subject: Re: mod_accel reverse proxying?
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:25:49 +1100

Philip Mak wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2001, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> > I think it should have reverse syntax:
> >
> > AccelReverse  http://127.0.0.1:8001/   /
> >
> > Or not ? Of course it complicates porting from mod_proxy to mod_accel
> > but I think it's clearer then ProxyPassReverse syntax.
>
> I don't think either order is more clearer than the other, but since
> ProxyPassReverse has it like / http://127.0.0.1:8001/, my personal opinion
> is that AccelPassReverse should have it in the same order too to avoid
> confusion.
>
On the other hand, I find mod_proxy's syntax weird and support Igor's
proposal. Still, either one would be very handy!

===

To: Jeremy Howard <jh_lists@fastmail.fm>
From: Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
Subject: Re: mod_accel reverse proxying?
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 10:21:07 +0300 (MSK)

On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, Jeremy Howard wrote:

> Philip Mak wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Dec 2001, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> > > I think it should have reverse syntax:
> > >
> > > AccelReverse  http://127.0.0.1:8001/   /
> > >
> > > Or not ? Of course it complicates porting from mod_proxy to mod_accel
> > > but I think it's clearer then ProxyPassReverse syntax.
> >
> > I don't think either order is more clearer than the other, but since
> > ProxyPassReverse has it like / http://127.0.0.1:8001/, my personal opinion
> > is that AccelPassReverse should have it in the same order too to avoid
> > confusion.
> >
> On the other hand, I find mod_proxy's syntax weird and support Igor's
> proposal. Still, either one would be very handy!

RewriteRule   ^/$     http://backend/$1
AccelReverse   /      http://backend/

Today there will be mod_accel-1.0.10 and mod_deflate-1.0.10 tarballs.
I'll post message.

===

To: John Siracusa <siracusa@mindspring.com>
From: Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
Subject: Re: mod_accel-1.0.10 and mod_deflate-1.0.10
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 20:42:58 +0300 (MSK)

On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, John Siracusa wrote:

> On 12/29/01 8:23 AM, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> > ftp://ftp.lexa.ru/pub/apache-rus/contrib/mod_accel-1.0.10.tar.gz
> 
> Is there any timeline on a release of mod_accel with English documentation?

I hope it will be ready in January.
At least Danil Pismenny promised it.

===

To: modperl@apache.org
From: Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
Subject: mod_accel English documentation
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 21:45:26 +0300 (MSK)

Danil Pismenny had begun to translate into English mod_accel documentation:
http://dapi.chaz.ru/articles/mod_accel.xml?lang=en
Please send him (dapi@mail.ru) corrections.
If you don't understand some translation at all ask me.

Igor Sysoev



===
To: <modperl@apache.org>
From: "Jeremy Howard" <jh_lists@fastmail.fm>
Subject: mod_accel/mod_deflate update
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 10:51:00 +1100

mod_accel and mod_deflate are the modules I discussed a couple of weeks ago
to allow you to create an efficient HTTP accelerator front-end to your
mod_perl servers.

I incorrectly reported 2 days ago that mod_deflate does not work with
Mozilla-based browsers. It turns out that the problem is nothing to do with
mod_deflate, but is actually the combination of mod_accel and mod_ssl and
how Mozilla handles keep-alives. Igor Sysoev has done a marvellous job of
diagnosing this problem, and has identified the workaround that in your SSL
virtual host section you need to add:
 ----
   SetEnvIf User-Agent ".*Gecko.*" \
            nokeepalive ssl-unclean-shutdown \
            downgrade-1.0 force-response-1.0
 ----

This is not necessary with mod_proxy HTTP accelerators because mod_proxy
always uses HTTP/1.0.



===
To: <modperl@apache.org>
From: Philip Mak <pmak@animeglobe.com>
Subject: <Directory>AccelNoPass in mod_accel
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 09:26:45 -0500 (EST)

Is there a way to specify an AccelNoPass directive (from mod_accel) that
only affects a certain directory?

For example, consider the following scenario:

AccelPass /~user1/ http://127.0.0.1:8001/
AccelNoPass ~*\.gif$ ~*\.jpg$

AccelPass /~user2/ http://127.0.0.1:8002/
AccelNoPass ~*\.gif$

Someone might want to specify separate AccelNoPass settings for those two
directories. It doesn't seem to work when I put it in <Directory> though;
I get "AccelNoPass not allowed here" error.

(I don't actually need this functionality at this point and I think it's
an obscure case, but I felt it was worth pointing out.)

===
To: Philip Mak <pmak@animeglobe.com>
From: Igor Sysoev <is@rambler-co.ru>
Subject: Re: <Directory>AccelNoPass in mod_accel
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:17:13 +0300 (MSK)

On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Philip Mak wrote:

> Is there a way to specify an AccelNoPass directive (from mod_accel) that
> only affects a certain directory?
> 
> For example, consider the following scenario:
> 
> AccelPass /~user1/ http://127.0.0.1:8001/
> AccelNoPass ~*\.gif$ ~*\.jpg$
> 
> AccelPass /~user2/ http://127.0.0.1:8002/
> AccelNoPass ~*\.gif$
> 
> Someone might want to specify separate AccelNoPass settings for those two
> directories. It doesn't seem to work when I put it in <Directory> though;
> I get "AccelNoPass not allowed here" error.
> 
> (I don't actually need this functionality at this point and I think it's
> an obscure case, but I felt it was worth pointing out.)

No. Both AccelPass and AccelNoPass run in translation phase and 
sets or does not set 'accel-handler'. So if AccelNoPass could run in
<Location> or <Directory> then it means that mod_accel needs
to skip 'accel-handler' and found another one instead - mod_accel needs 
to run subrequest.

I think it complicates processing and is not needed in many cases.
Besides in your example case you can use such regexps:

AccelNoPass  ~*\.gif$  ~*^/~user1/.*\.jpg$

===


the rest of The Pile (a partial mailing list archive)

doom@kzsu.stanford.edu