Hey Valentin,
> I'm very unhappy with lots of #if(def)-s are introduced by the patch.
> Is there something can be done with that?
Added code depends on presence of ALPN support in OpenSSL, so I don't
see how we could get away without all those #ifdefs... I'm open to
suggestions, though :)
> But
On Monday 04 November 2013 14:27:44 Piotr Sikora wrote:
[..]
> # HG changeset patch
> # User Piotr Sikora
> # Date 1383560396 28800
> # Mon Nov 04 02:19:56 2013 -0800
> # Node ID 78d793c51d5aa0ba8eec48340de49bfc3d17c97d
> # Parent dea321e5c0216efccbb23e84bbce7cf3e28f130c
> SSL: support ALPN
I think Arnaud is suggesting that instead of a request flow like:
1. nginx[A] receives request, forwards to upstream[B]
2. upstream[B] creates response and replies to nginx[A]
3. nginx[A] forwards response to upstream[C]
4. upstream[C] modifies response and replies to nginx[A]
5. nginx[A] returns
Hi Arnaud,
Thanks for your response but my goal is to have only one Nginx server, not
chaining them.
>From what I've seen, I think I should be able to achieve this using proxy +
>lua module, and I'll write my own module using subrequests if performance is
>too low.
Regards,
Thierry
-Mess
Hi Thierry,
This is the nginx-devel mailing-list (for development and commits), I
guess you will have better luck on nginx user list
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
nginx can be an upstream of another nginx (as reverse proxy).
This means that you can chain nginx [A]->nginx [B]->ng
