Re: squid3-largeobj squid3/src HttpHdrRange.cc...

On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 00:40 +0200, Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> On tor, 2007-08-02 at 01:32 +0300, Tsantilas Christos wrote:
>
> > At the end I convert Config.readAheadGap and Config.quickAbort.min/max
> > to b_int64_t types.
>
> Ok.
>
> > But this is changes the default units for Config.quickAbort.min/max
> > parameters and make them different than those of squid26 configuration
> > file. Is it any problem with it?
>
> Not in my eyes.
>
> And certainly not if changing the code to no longer accept unitless
> specifications.
>
> These directives have always been unit based, and at least 2.6 (probably
> 2.5 as well) gives big fat warnings issued if the user specify them
> without unit. So the change to make Squid-3 require an unit is minor.
>
> My view is that any Squid-2 configurations out in the field without an
> unit specified is bad configurations and should be fixed, even for
> Squid-2. So having Squid-3 reject them is actually an improvement. The
> fixed configuration will work as expected in both versions.

If a unitless configuration is rejected, there is no problem. If it is
accepted (with a warning) and then interpreted differently from Squid2,
I think there is a problem because many admins will [continue to] ignore
the warning.

Can you make the units required in this particular case?

If there is consensus that units should be required everywhere, I am
fine with that (but still worried).

Alex.
Received on Wed Aug 01 2007 - 16:53:58 MDT