So is "rewrite_by_lua" also evil?

Nginx User nginx at
Fri Oct 14 11:41:24 UTC 2011

On 14 October 2011 14:01, Eugaia <ngx.eugaia at> wrote:
> On 13/10/2011 07:55, agentzh wrote:
>> Well, I still believe it is a bug in ngx_http_named_location function in
>> the nginx core. The thumb of rule is to avoid using named locations like
>> @proxy but use normal locations configured with the "internal" directive.
>> And we've been keeping doing this in our production apps.
> In some situations it's probably the desired effect to reset the contexts,
> but not all.  There are multiple situations in modules I've developed / am
> developing where resetting contexts would be highly undesirable and would
> break the code.  I would say it should probably just be left up to the
> modules to reset their own contexts if they need to (as is the case now), or
> to just define multiple modules which would use different contexts anyway.

That throws a different spot light on things.

I don't know about the guts of Nginx but I suppose the main point
would be for things to work consistently. I.E. if this context is
cleared in some places in the core (normal locations), then, it should
be cleared in all similar places (all locations) except of course if
there is specific good reason not to. Module developers should have a
clear understanding of this "feature".

Think I will go into holding mode with the standard rewrite module
(which works without issue) for now.
Just that lua allows for more complex logic for my tests.

Thanks for your efforts chaps.

More information about the nginx mailing list