Re: [RFC] accel mode config changes

 On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 02:59:08 +0200, Henrik Nordström wrote:
> ons 2011-07-27 klockan 11:42 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries:
>
>> So you are in faviour of going back to the 2.7 behaviour where
>> there
>> are effectively two near-identical reverse-proxy modes? one for
>> virtual
>> hosting and one for non.
>
> 2.7 have three accelerator modes
>
> vhost with or without defaultsite
> defaultsite alone
> vport

 Okay. Being pedantic yes. I consider the first and last both flavours
 of "virtual hosting". First is domain based, last is IP-based.

>
> how is this different in 3.2? I do not see any difference in reading
> the
> docs for 3.2.

 3.2 requires a flag to turn on the mode so the additional parse checks
 work properly. 2.7 has "implies accel". 3.1+ have "requires accel". This
 is supposed to be the only difference until the default behaviour change
 now added.

 Configured so, incorporating your proposal with mine: (3.2 line is as
 of revno. )

 type 1: "vhost with or without defaultsite"
         (NP: also with or without a custom port)

 (2.7) vhost [defaultsite=] [vport[=N]]
 (3.1) accel vhost [defaultsite=] [vport[=N]]
 (3.2) accel [defaultsite=] [vport[=N]]

 PROPOSED: vhost [defaultsite=] [port=N]

 CHANGE: upgrade accel+vhost to "vhost" with notice.

 type 2: "defaultsite alone"

 (2.7) defaultsite=host [vport=N]
 (2.7) defaultsite=host[:port]
 (3.1) accel defaultsite=host[:port]
 (3.1) accel defaultsite=host [vport=N]
 (3.2) accel no-vhost defaultsite=host:port
 (3.2) accel no-vhost defaultsite=host[:port] [vport=N]

 PROPOSED: accel defaultsite= [port=N]

 CHANGE: reject/error on defaultsite=host:port

 CHANGE: drop auto-upgrade of accel to accel+vhost

 CHANGE: drop no-vhost again. accel with absent vhost now duplicates
 that.

 type 3: "vport"

 (2.7) vport
 (3.1) accel vport

 PROPOSED: ipvhost [port=N]

 CHANGE: reject/error on any defaultsite=

 CHANGE: upgrade accel+vport to "ipvhost" with notice.

 CHANGE: alter notice of vport without prior accel or vhost to show
 options

> I found your mode change before you responded and agree to it.
>
> My preferred action is what I said before. Make vhost the default
> accelerator mode, and add a no-vhost option to disable it for cases
> when
> one want just defaultsite or vport.
>
> regarding vport that option also needs serious cleanup. It's both
> named
> wrongly and overloaded with the vport=NN alternative. Better split
> into
>
> ipvhost
> port=NN
>
> and may also add
>
> pathprefix=...
>

 For Zope you think? nice idea.

>
> Not entirely sure if ipvhost is even needed. Only makes sense for
> massive IP based vhosting if anyone is still doing that. in all other
> configurations using IP based vhosting one http_port per IP and a
> suitable defaultsite is more suitable. But I would strongly advice to
> always use vhost mode and at most override the port.

 I agree, its probably not needed, but I'm still helping people convert
 to domain based virtual hosting so probably too early to drop as well.

 Amos
Received on Wed Jul 27 2011 - 02:30:45 MDT