Bug 379811
Summary: | Apache CacheMaxExpire directive ignored (upstream reported bug with patch) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 | Reporter: | Issue Tracker <tao> | |
Component: | httpd | Assignee: | Joe Orton <jorton> | |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | BaseOS QE Security Team <qe-baseos-security> | |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | ||
Priority: | high | |||
Version: | 5.0 | CC: | ddumas, mpoole, syeghiay, tao | |
Target Milestone: | rc | |||
Target Release: | --- | |||
Hardware: | All | |||
OS: | Linux | |||
Whiteboard: | ||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | ||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
Clone Of: | ||||
: | 740242 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2011-07-21 08:53:02 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: | ||||
Bug Depends On: | ||||
Bug Blocks: | 499522, 740242, 820738 |
Description
Issue Tracker
2007-11-13 12:38:51 UTC
State the problem 1. Provide time and date of problem Always when using the module. 2. Provide clear and concise problem description as it is understood at the time of escalation It looks like the CacheMaxExpire setting from the http config is ignored when you use the cache module The age in the response header exceeds the setting we specified with the CacheMaxExpire directive. Only when the Expires header time is reached the content expires, although the documentation says that this maximum value is enforced even if an expiry date was supplied with the document. http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_cache.html#cachemaxexpire from customer's httpd config: <IfModule mod_cache.c> CacheDefaultExpire 7200 #CacheLastModifiedFactor 0.5 CacheMaxExpire 14400 #MCacheRemovalAlgorithm LRU # CacheIgnoreHeaders Set-Cookie Keep-Alive Connection Expires CacheIgnoreHeaders Set-Cookie Via 3. State specific action requested of SEG Check if the upstream bug which already has a patch could be included or if any other work around would solve their problem. 4. State whether or not a defect in the product is suspected http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id If you find it necessary to include more information please let me know. Thanks. This event sent from IssueTracker by mpoole [Support Engineering Group] issue 137789 Upstream bugs (both with patches against 2.2) http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21260 http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39418 Neither have been accepted/committed. This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion, but this component is not scheduled to be updated in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. This request will be reviewed for a future Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release. This request was previously evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release, but Red Hat was unable to resolve it in time. This request will be reviewed for a future Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in the current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Because the affected component is not scheduled to be updated in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately unable to address this request at this time. Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. This is a mismatch between implementation and the docs. CacheMaxExpire currently only takes effect in bounding the calculated expiry time in the absence of an Expires header, despite what the docs say. Changing that behaviour is probably undesirable, but we could introduce either a new directive or a parameter for this directive to enable use of CacheMaxExpire as a bound on all expiry calculation, depending on upstream consensus. Requesting blocker approval - Joe has a fix ready to go and QE agrees. An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1067.html An advisory has been issued which should help the problem described in this bug report. This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files, please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report if the solution does not work for you. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1067.html |