Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add access_by_lua(_block/_file) and access_by_lua_no_postpone #217

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

arcivanov
Copy link

Some rudimentary tests

@arcivanov arcivanov force-pushed the access_by_lua branch 2 times, most recently from 42a195d to 7b9c916 Compare November 9, 2020 09:15
@arcivanov
Copy link
Author

@agentzh @xiaocang @tangsty please review and merge.
The failures appear in SSL and unrelated to the changes.

@arcivanov
Copy link
Author

@agentzh @xiaocang @tangsty bump?

@arcivanov
Copy link
Author

1 similar comment
@arcivanov
Copy link
Author

@edevil
Copy link

edevil commented Dec 6, 2020

This would also be useful for me since I want to resolve a name to be used in balancer_by_lua_block.

@arcivanov
Copy link
Author

1 similar comment
@arcivanov
Copy link
Author

@xiaocang
Copy link
Contributor

@arcivanov Got it, I'll look into it.

@@ -28,13 +28,14 @@ init


=== TEST 2: get_phase in access_by_lua
TODO
--- SKIP
--- stream_server_config
access_by_lua_block {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we add a test that using both preread and access phases?
Does the access phase have the limitation below in the preread phase?

However, keep in mind that calling the receive() method of the request socket will consume the data from the buffer and such consumed data will not be seen by handlers further down the chain.

Some rudimentary tests

Requested cleanup of `#if 1`

Try fixing tests
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants