OK, I expect to send the patches late Friday german time (tomorrow, but
in 3 minutes today).
Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Good news.
Will you cut another mod_jk version close to 5.5.17 (it will be to late
for that one), or are you planning to keep 1.2.16 in development for at
least 1-
Rainer Jung wrote:
Good news.
Will you cut another mod_jk version close to 5.5.17 (it will be to late
for that one), or are you planning to keep 1.2.16 in development for at
least 1-2 weeks further on?
We had a preliminary vote two weeks ago, and everyone agreed
to go for the 1.2.16, so if yo
Good news.
Will you cut another mod_jk version close to 5.5.17 (it will be to late
for that one), or are you planning to keep 1.2.16 in development for at
least 1-2 weeks further on?
In any case I will prepare a patch.
Any other comments?
Mladen Turk wrote:
Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi List, hi Mla
Rainer Jung wrote:
Hi List, hi Mladen (master of mod_jk):
I could supply a patch including documentation. I think that would be
low risk, because that patch would only influence how the load counters
are handled, and would not interfere with changing worker status and
decision logic.
Comme
Hi List, hi Mladen (master of mod_jk):
a year ago we changed to algorithm in mod_jk, that "counts" weighted
requests in the lb worker to decide, which balanced worker should
receive the next request.
The new algorithm three main advantages:
a) using only integers
b) using only a limited rang
