Github user jacksontj closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554
---
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 featu
Github user jacksontj commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-215864574
@zwoop @jpeach @SolidWallOfCode After chatting some more on IRC today, it
seems the people are quite against the milestones approach-- so I've changed
this patc
Github user sudheerv commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-214694979
Oh, in any case, I haven't really checked carefully, but I actually wonder
if the milestone (server begin write) in question here is reset for "each"
server leg
Github user sudheerv commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-214693606
The problem is that you are trying to "mix" the internals of a completely
independent/different feature to use for an unrelated/unintended purposes. This
sets a
Github user jacksontj commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-214621535
Well, I'm not sure that I agree it violates the encapsulation-- since its
effectively a variable that tracks timings (which are only set in specific
states in t
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-214505724
It's unfortunate because it couple internal state in the SM to the
milestones, which are timing events. This means, changes to the milestones
could have bad effects
Github user jacksontj commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-214491833
Can you guys expand on the concern with using milestones for this? I can
easily add another bool to the state machine (or change the
`request_body_start` to `re
Github user JamesPeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-214490389
As per IRC discussion with @zwoop and @bryancall, I think we should find a
way to not use the milestones to track the state transition.
---
If your project is
Github user jacksontj commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-207539560
After chatting with @jpeach we agree on the goal here (to not retry if
bytes were sent on the wire). I have updated the PR to include comments
attempting to exp
Github user jpeach commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-207223148
I looked at this for a while and I'm not convinced that it doesn't have
unindented side-effects. ``is_request_retryable`` is only set once POST data is
getting sen
Github user bgaff commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/554#issuecomment-206675022
I did the original fix for this bug and this missed case definitely makes
sense. I'm :+1: with the fix. The only thing that looks a little weird is using
milestones
11 matches
Mail list logo
