Github user PSUdaemon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/763
Yes, merge and mark what files you resolved conflicts in. Git normally puts
this in the commented part of the commit message so just make sure you
uncomment before commit.
---
If your
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/781
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/781
We can't merge this into 6.2.x. We need it in master, than I will
cherry-pick it back.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appe
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/741
Is there a `.clang-tidy` config we can add and run with `make` like `make
clang-tidy`?
Also, is this an alternative proposal to #739, or in addition to?
---
If your project is set
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/738
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/738#discussion_r68441459
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/remap_stats/remap_stats.c ---
@@ -92,19 +92,20 @@ stat_add(char *name, TSMgmtInt amount,
TSStatPersistence
Github user PSUdaemon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/738#discussion_r68441181
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/remap_stats/remap_stats.c ---
@@ -92,19 +92,20 @@ stat_add(char *name, TSMgmtInt amount,
TSStatPersistence
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/738
[approve ci]
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/738#discussion_r68431089
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/remap_stats/remap_stats.c ---
@@ -92,19 +92,19 @@ stat_add(char *name, TSMgmtInt amount,
TSStatPersistence
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/738
Just for the record, I was thinking: `tmp = effective_url =
TSHttpTxnEffectiveUrlStringGet(txn, &len);`
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/738
What do you think of moving the `effective_url` creation down below so that
we don't even alloc it until we are past that check?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/728
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/727
---
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
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/728
TS-4572: Fix "Unchecked return value" (CID 1356972)
If the function returns an error value, the error value may be mistaken for
a normal value.
In get_effective_host: Valu
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/727
TS-4571: Fix "pointer to local outside scope" (CID 1356978)
Dereferencing the returned or out-of-scope stack pointer will access an
invalid location on the stack after its scop
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/678
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/678
Weird. I get `error: could not apply 1f4a810... Doc: Format po files` when
I do the cherry pick. But this is fine, I'll just merge this.
Thanks.
---
If your project i
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/568#issuecomment-220764504
Are there still outstanding issues here or is it possible to merge this now?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219586815
Ok, well I assume @pbchou can take it from here?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219586100
Missing the `optarg = NULL` in the global case on purpose?
Also, I think we do want that `ifdef` around the `optind`. And I looked it
up, we need to
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/571#issuecomment-219553317
Can you please explain "do not play well together"? The `:` makes that
option required I think. Also, most if not all of these plugins are
develo
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/304#issuecomment-216096770
Is there a new issue for this? I have some more information to share.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/606#issuecomment-215622970
I like the robustness, it's just hard to tell that this commit is anything
more than a refactor. I'd just separate the small fix out and leave the re
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/606#issuecomment-215619566
The 4th commit is so much refactoring with no change in behavior that it's
hard to follow what the actual fix is. I agree that `r` is a poor variable
name
Github user PSUdaemon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/606#discussion_r61531390
--- Diff: proxy/http/HttpConfig.cc ---
@@ -888,8 +888,6 @@ HttpConfig::startup()
HttpEstablishStaticConfigLongLong
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/589
---
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
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/589
TS-4357: Remove SSLv2 and only allow SSLv3 to origin with configure oâ¦
â¦ption.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com
Github user PSUdaemon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/560#discussion_r60003490
--- Diff: plugins/experimental/acme/acme.c ---
@@ -0,0 +1,347 @@
+/** @file
+
+@section license
+
+Licensed under the Apache
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/560
TS-4320: Add ACME Plugin
This is a first pass at making an ACME plugin for ATS. This current version
amounts to a simple static file server that leverages a CLI client, but there
are
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/559
TS-4339: Remove .pr file
Remove .pr hack now that we have MATT.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/PSUdaemon/trafficserver
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/330#issuecomment-208439499
Closing this per discussion above.
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/330
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/502#issuecomment-202990616
This kinda feels like it should be three separate PR's.
f304c50a2c00d7d711015c981b2007dacdf159b7 - seems probably ok, simply
because if it'
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/525#issuecomment-200348327
@masaori335, yes exactly. It does look very generic already and it seems
valuable to have in lib/ts. I can't think of anything offhand that would need
it
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/525#issuecomment-199873028
Is it possible to make the priority queue stuff more generic so it can be
reusable?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/498
TS-4227: Remove auto_ptr in SPDY plugin
This only applies to 5.3.x and is because F22 has a version of GCC that has
deprecated auto_ptr.
You can merge this pull request into a Git
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/304#issuecomment-187803567
Wanted to update, our prod issues did not go away completely, but were
greatly reduced. So I don't think this is the correct or complete fix, but it'
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#issuecomment-186988593
Duh. Sorry, looking too hard at malloc.
I have been trying to find macro we can use, but there isn't anything that
I can find that works well. Th
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#issuecomment-186979652
@bgaff,
I think the 8 byte thing is a glibc implementation detail. Also, [this
link](http://www.delorie.com/gnu/docs/glibc/libc_31.html
) suggests
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#issuecomment-186967151
@jpeach,
I can't speak to the relative ugliness of the code. It's fairly C-ish like
the rest of our memory related code.
I don&#
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#issuecomment-186454905
:+1: This looks good to me.
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/481#issuecomment-186442215
Merged.
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/481
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#discussion_r53530177
--- Diff: lib/ts/ink_memory.cc ---
@@ -209,6 +210,46 @@ ats_mlock(caddr_t addr, size_t len)
return res;
}
+void
Github user PSUdaemon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/489#discussion_r53529845
--- Diff: lib/ts/ink_memory.cc ---
@@ -209,6 +210,46 @@ ats_mlock(caddr_t addr, size_t len)
return res;
}
+void
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/481#issuecomment-184719907
I addressed the comments above. At some point in the future I want to
replace this with a page allocator for the freelists but that is going to be a
bigger
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/481
TS-4211: Make freelist_new cleaner so we can debug better.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/PSUdaemon/trafficserver
Github user PSUdaemon closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/479
---
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
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/479
Freelist cleanup 2
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/PSUdaemon/trafficserver freelist_cleanup_2
Alternatively you can
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/472
TS-4198: Restore sync buffer cleanup.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/PSUdaemon/trafficserver
cache_dir_hugepage_free
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/470
TS-4197: Add memory debugging
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/PSUdaemon/trafficserver memory_debug
Alternatively you
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/359#issuecomment-165233077
Hey @jpeach, where do you feel this sits? @zwoop is branching 6.1.x soon
and wondering if this can make it in or we should push it back to 6.2.x
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/369#issuecomment-164002946
Updated with url_len removed.
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/369#issuecomment-163997300
There was a lot of redundant or plainly wrong code in there. Like we
treated round_robin as a boolean and as an enum.
Also a little bit of added NULL
GitHub user PSUdaemon opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/369
TS-4030: Allow parent selection to ignore query string
This allows you to drop the query string when doing the consistent hash in
parent selection. Default behavior is the same. Add
Github user PSUdaemon commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/330#discussion_r45298596
--- Diff: proxy/http/HttpTransactCache.cc ---
@@ -1299,7 +1299,7 @@
HttpTransactCache::match_response_to_request_conditionals(HTTPHdr *request, HTTP
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/302#issuecomment-15062
@dmorilha, this looks pretty good. I am almost ready to commit it. Can you
add one last change? Please update the NOTICES file. Then I will merge
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/304#issuecomment-146888152
FWIW, I use this in prod and our corruption issues have gone away. We are
not using hardening so I think we see silent corruption instead of crashes like
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/302#issuecomment-146683942
I should also add this looks very interesting and thanks for contributing
it!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/302#issuecomment-146682956
This belongs under the experimental directory.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/300#issuecomment-145647206
This looks reasonable. I'm not surprised that the existing code is broken.
I wrote it in a hurry to be able to remove Boost but I guess I didn&#
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/160#issuecomment-113212815
TS-3706
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-3706
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/226#issuecomment-113203717
TS-3698: Linking with JIRA issue.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-3698
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/201#issuecomment-113199261
TS-3705: Created JIRA issue to track this
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-3705
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/228#issuecomment-112934087
This has to wait until 7.0.0.
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/160#issuecomment-112916955
Tried to commit and there was a merge conflict. Can you rebase onto master?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/192#issuecomment-112873763
@jacksontj - You going to commit this?
Should we create JIRA's for tsqa?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/189#issuecomment-112872594
@jacksontj - Are you going to commit this?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/182#issuecomment-112872161
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-2157
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/160#issuecomment-112871386
I'll commit this today.
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/141#issuecomment-112871152
This should be closed.
---
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
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/85#issuecomment-112869469
This is associated with JIRA TS-2803 which was closed as "won't fix". Can
this be closed now, or is there something here we need to reconsider
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/74#issuecomment-112869069
I don't think this patch is going to be accepted as is. Can you fix or
close this pull request?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/68#issuecomment-112868309
This is JIRA TS-2666 and has been added and closed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/35#issuecomment-112865103
Sorry we've taken so long to get back to you. We haven't been paying much
attention to pull requests not associated with JIRA's, but w
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/161#issuecomment-112621657
Interim cache has been removed as of 6.0.0.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/225#issuecomment-112621262
Sorry, I forgot to add the "this closes" part. @cjqian, can you close this
please?
Thanks.
---
If your project is set up for it, you ca
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/221#issuecomment-111332012
This PR includes part of #219 in it. It appears that you branched from your
previous branch instead of from master?
Please fix.
---
If your project
78 matches
Mail list logo
