Re: Address Sanitizer issue in detecting memory leak.

2016-11-10 Thread Bryan Call
It is working on my Fedora 24. You might need to upgrade your compiler or OS. [bcall@homer ~]$ cat test.cc #include void dummy() { void *x = malloc(20); } int main() { dummy(); return 0; } [bcall@homer ~]$ g++ test.cc -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fsanitize=address [bcall@homer ~]$ ./a.out ===

Re: Address Sanitizer issue in detecting memory leak.

2016-11-10 Thread Sudheer Vinukonda
Not sure if the *leak* in your test code below is detectable..since your program is exiting after allocating the memory (system should automatically reclaim the memory on process exit). You may try to modify it to something more explicit like the below - > #include > void dummy() { > char *

Re: Don't negative cache 400 responses.

2016-11-10 Thread Alan Carroll
Yes. I originally looked at a plugin but as I thought about it I came to the conclusion that negative caching 400 is simply the wrong thing to do, because it is dependent on the user agent, not the origin server, and likely has no relationship to the success of subsequent requests, which is diff

Re: Don't negative cache 400 responses.

2016-11-10 Thread Sudheer Vinukonda
Just for the sake of completeness, it should be fairly straightforward to write a plugin or even use conf_remap/header_rewrite to basically strip Cache-Control headers from the Origin AND override proxy.config.http.negative_caching_enabled to false on a 400 status from the Origin. Although, my