Github user jablko closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/59
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature i
Github user jablko commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/59#issuecomment-38762353
Thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
en
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/63#issuecomment-38756233
Also, do you have instructions on how to reproduce this issue?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/55#issuecomment-38756145
This request was pulled as e5b8b1dbd0694060871c7c45e7b80640e5ac766f. Please
verify and close. Thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this em
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/63#issuecomment-38756086
jablko, can you please make a new branch from master for this pull request?
I think that we should also have a new Jira ticket, since TS-2553 is long
closed.
---
I
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/59#issuecomment-38755638
This request was pulled as 362c8b692bb28c6bbd1232cad5477539dff4539f. Please
verify and close. Thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this em
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/57#issuecomment-38755590
This request was pulled. Please verify and close. Thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as w
> On Mar 26, 2014, at 12:31 PM, Thomas Jackson wrote:
>
> The biggest performance gain I see of separate regexes is that I can
> execute the unique domain regexes which should resolve to a list of path
> regexes. This should be pretty big performance wise as a lot of rules in
> large remaps hav
The biggest performance gain I see of separate regexes is that I can
execute the unique domain regexes which should resolve to a list of path
regexes. This should be pretty big performance wise as a lot of rules in
large remaps have the same domain which may or may not be a regex.
On Mar 26, 2014 6
GitHub user nayaniabhishek opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/68
Add support for whitelist of headers to be proxied from origin servers by
combo handler
Combo handler strips out all headers from the individual responses except
for Expires and Conten
Hello,
We did not progress in TFO. Currently we are developing some custom plugins
and investigating some forms to improve regexp purge.
Our plan is to solve the TFO issue in about 4 months.
Regards.
Alex Sandro Garzão
Porto Alegre, Brasil + 55 51 3012 3005
Miami, USA + 1 305 704 8816
Quaisqu
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:48 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-03-25 at 20:25 -0600, Phil Sorber wrote:
>
> > > > An API change like that affects existing plugins and could leave us
> > > > needing some ugly #ifdef crap to support both before- and after- TS
> > > > versions. Can I make a plea
> On Mar 26, 2014, at 2:02 AM, Brian Geffon wrote:
>
> Thomas, I somewhat agree: my guess would be the additional regexes would
> likely cancel any performance gain there.
>
> Does anyone else have feedback or comments?
The other argument for this is that with separate regexes, you don't hav
Thomas, I somewhat agree: my guess would be the additional regexes would
likely cancel any performance gain there.
Does anyone else have feedback or comments?
Brian
On Tuesday, March 25, 2014, Thomas Jackson wrote:
> Another consideration for having >1 regex (which may or may not be
> prematur
14 matches
Mail list logo
