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

combine_javascript conflict with rewrite_domains #287

Closed
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Apr 6, 2015 · 6 comments
Closed

combine_javascript conflict with rewrite_domains #287

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Apr 6, 2015 · 6 comments

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

@GoogleCodeExporter GoogleCodeExporter commented Apr 6, 2015

It seems that mod_pagespeed_xyz variables are hashes of the js file names, so 
they do not change. However, with sharding enabled, the eval() statements call 
on variables with incorrect/different and ch names.

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Enable domains sharding.
2. Enable combine_javascript

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

Combined js file with mod_pagespeed_xyz variables called by eval() statement 
after. When sharding is enabled, the eval() calls variables by 
incorrect/different name.

MPS 0.9.17.3-679 / Fedora Apache worker MPM

Original issue reported on code.google.com by webmas...@clubsilver.org on 8 May 2011 at 7:23

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

@GoogleCodeExporter GoogleCodeExporter commented Apr 6, 2015

Does this happen only with rewrite_domains?  Or does it happen with that filter 
turned off, with ModPagespeedShardDomain directives alone?

Original comment by jmara...@google.com on 8 May 2011 at 3:20

  • Changed title: combine_javascript conflict with rewrite_domains
  • Changed state: RequestClarification
@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

@GoogleCodeExporter GoogleCodeExporter commented Apr 6, 2015

It happens with rewrite_domains disabled as well.

Original comment by webmas...@clubsilver.org on 8 May 2011 at 4:11

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

@GoogleCodeExporter GoogleCodeExporter commented Apr 6, 2015

Original comment by jmara...@google.com on 8 May 2011 at 5:10

  • Changed state: New
@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

@GoogleCodeExporter GoogleCodeExporter commented Apr 6, 2015

Confirmed. 

Original comment by morlov...@google.com on 10 May 2011 at 6:38

  • Changed state: Accepted
@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

@GoogleCodeExporter GoogleCodeExporter commented Apr 6, 2015

This issue was closed by revision r682.

Original comment by morlov...@google.com on 10 May 2011 at 8:32

  • Changed state: Fixed
@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

@GoogleCodeExporter GoogleCodeExporter commented Apr 6, 2015

Is it safe to compile current trunk to test it out or is there a way to pull a 
specific revision number?

Original comment by webmas...@clubsilver.org on 10 May 2011 at 10:14

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
1 participant
You can’t perform that action at this time.