Bug 107152
| Summary: | RewriteRule /software/rhea/(.*)$ /software/rha/$1 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Web Site | Reporter: | Vadim Nasardinov <vnasardinov> |
| Component: | Other | Assignee: | Web Development <webdev> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Web Development <webdev> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | current | CC: | berrange |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | http://www.redhat.com/software/rhea/customers/aplaws/ | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2003-10-22 20:38:49 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Vadim Nasardinov
2003-10-15 14:41:13 UTC
This was implemented this way intentionally -- supposedly due to server load issues, there may have been other considerations as well. Thanks for the response.
I was just curious
(a) why would
RewriteRule /software/rhea/(.*)$ /software/rha/$1
supposedly result in a much higher server load than
RewriteRule /software/rhea/(.*)$ /software/rha/
(b) what is the contribution of
http://www.redhat.com/software/rhea/ to the overall
server load, percentagewise? Our collective unfounded
intuition is, it's probably about 1%. Even if the proposed
full-blown redirect doubles that number for some unexplained
reason, the RHEA contribution to the overall servers' workload
would then be only 2%, hardly a cause for concern.
If anyone has the time to answer either or both of these questions,
their responsiveness would be greatly appreciated. If not, we'll
just say "tough cheese" and move on.
Thanks again.
I did some digging and after a little tail-chasing, I think we're straight. Ignore my original response, I unthinkingly copied what someone else said. It turns out that this was just a miscommunication and the redirect can as easily keep the tail of the url as lop it off, so I've put in a request to have it kept. From here it depends on how well it fits into SOC's schedule to make the config change, test it, and push it live -- even simple changes like this have some process around them (part of the reason it is the way it is now), so don't count on it right away, but it should be on its way. Awesome. Thanks a million. Is there a place where one can check on the status of this thing directly and see if it's moving up the SOC's task queue? Despite our laments, there is not. However with a bunch of other RHEL3-related redirects going in today it's likely to get fixed. seems to have gone through. check it out. indeed, it has. thanks again. |