[Mongrel-development] Small updates and release plan

Wayne E. Seguin
Mon, 10 Dec 2007 23:30:15 -0000

On Dec 10, 2007 3:24 PM, Luis Lavena <luislavena at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Dec 10, 2007 5:11 PM, Dave Cheney <dave at cheney.net> wrote:
> > Yes - it means using nginx as a proxy to mongrel will actually work !
> >
> > The current behavior ''stuns'' nginx every time
mongrel decides it
> > doesn''t like the request as passed (which is fair, nginx
isn''t as
> > strict in its request parsing as mongrel) causing it to try every
> > mongrel in the balancer group in quick succession. The patch makes
> > mongrel behave correctly according to the spec and report the correct
> > error rather than relying on nginx to pass back a 50x when there are
> > no mongrel left.
> >
>
> So in theory this patch fix the nginx behavior, but how this affects
> other balancers like apache one? (I know is broken, but couldn''t
miss
> the importance).
>
> Based on RFC rules [1], it seems is the correct behavior instead of
> the unexpected close of the connection.
>
> Adding some test to the malformed requests doesn''t seem
problematic,
> but I''ll love some feedback on cross-balancer results (apache,
> balancer, delegate, etc).
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.4
>

Good question, Dave, are you able to test other balancers?

  ~Wayne
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...