of this?
-Original Message-
From: Mark Eggers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 10:54 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Mod_jk + Apache on RHEL3 gives 503 for jsp only
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have jakarta-tomcat-5.5.9 installed and working
Here's a quick writeup.
This is going to be a long reply, and I hope it will
be useful.
I am using Fedora Core 4 as a model. I hope it will
be close enough to RHEL 3 to be useful. You may have
to change paths in order to correspond to your
environment.
First of all, my environment:
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have jakarta-tomcat-5.5.9 installed and working
properly on the new
server. It is perfectly accessible from the legacy
web server.
By perfectly accessible you mean . . . ?
The main page, home.jsp, loads fine in the servlet
if no page is
Thanks Mark,
I this helped a lot ... I'll insert comments as well... ;)
Mark Eggers wrote:
A couple of things here. I'll try to insert comment
where appropriate.
--- Don Boling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't seem to get anything to successfully pass
though the mod_jk connector to the
Glad I was able to help a little bit.
In my experience (Linux,Solaris,Win/2K), 8080 should
always work if you have the Connector configured. If
you can't get to http://localhost:8080/jsp-examples/
running, then there is something else amiss.
In your httpd.conf file, I still didn't see something
A couple of things here. I'll try to insert comment
where appropriate.
--- Don Boling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't seem to get anything to successfully pass
though the mod_jk connector to the webapp.
What version of mod_jk?
My mod_jk.conf , workers.properties are as follows.
$ less
Hi Peter,
That is why I mentioned it. We deliver our static content from other
servers,
and had originally considered hiding our TCs behind apache for
'security reasons'.
After seeing the speed difference, and the fact that their isn't
really a security
difference if you just push all
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 13:29, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Apache has better directory/file restricting and handling than Tomcat
better in what way? What actual *security* issue are we talking
about -- in other words, what exploit is Tomcat susceptible to
that Apache is not?
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 13:50, Andrew Miehs wrote:
We did some comparisons between running Tomcat 5.0 standalone, or TC
5.0 and Apache 2.0
If you are ONLY delivering JSPs, we found that we could only deal
with 50% of the requests when running combined Apache TC and mod_jk
OK, that's
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 18:52, Mark Thomas wrote:
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Tomcat is harder to configure and -sadly- it has a far worse documentation
than Apache (for now).
I look forward to seeing your documentation patches in Bugzilla ;)
I will certainly document how to fix my problem once it's
-Original Message-
From: Mark Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:53 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Tomcat is harder to configure and -sadly- it has a far worse
documentation than Apache (for now
Well I tried both, and as my websites do not have a very high traffic (I
have approximately a total of 50 GB per month) the speed is not primarily a
concern to me, I am looking to the security side of the problem and
Apache+mod_jk does its job better than only Tomcat concerning security.
I have
Marc
If the performance of your app is not acceptable using mod_jk , you could
try other alternatives and still keep apache in front to serve static
content and use other modules.
You can use apache mod_proxy to forward request on 8080 [or whatever your
run tomcat on] to tomcat without going
AFAIK mod_proxy performs worse than mod_jk.
Just my 2 cents.
Kerem
-Original Message-
From: Bruno Georges [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:58 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Cc: tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
Marc
marc ratun wrote:
Hi,
I just read an article about webapp benchmarks [1] and they mentioned that
apache+mod_jk+tomcat is about 30% slower than pure tomcat.
This is sad. Until now I believed that the performance decrease with
apache/mod_jk would be marginal.
Why would that be sad?
30%
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
... I am looking to the security side of the problem and
Apache+mod_jk does its job better than only Tomcat concerning security.
How so?
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com
] To: 'Tomcat Users List'
tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
ari.com.tr cc:
Subject: RE: mod_jk
is harder to configure and -sadly- it has a far worse documentation
than Apache (for now).
Best regards,
Kerem
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Schroeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:13 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
KEREM
Apache is easier to configure, but at a 50% performance hit for pure
JSP pages
Andrew
On Sep 14, 2005, at 2:18 PM, KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Apache has better directory/file restricting and handling than
Tomcat, it is
more customizable and it is much user/admin friendly to
configure :-)
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Apache has better directory/file restricting and handling than Tomcat
better in what way? What actual *security* issue are we talking
about -- in other words, what exploit is Tomcat susceptible to
that Apache is not?
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL
-Original Message-
From: Hassan Schroeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:30 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Apache has better directory/file restricting and handling
than Tomcat
better in what
I use Apache/mod_jk/Tomcat for a long time on production servers with load
balancing/failover (and with high traffic sites) and I'm sure it's not 30%
slower than a pure Tomcat.
I use Apache to deliver static files, manage SSL and other apache specifics
modules.
Then, Tomcat only manage
We did some comparisons between running Tomcat 5.0 standalone, or TC
5.0 and Apache 2.0
If you are ONLY delivering JSPs, we found that we could only deal
with 50% of the requests when running combined Apache TC and mod_jk
Andrew
On Sep 14, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Lionel Farbos wrote:
I use
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 14:55:08 +0300
KEREM ERKAN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mod_jk 1.2.10 had some performance problems
but I did not thoroughly test why.
Is is proved ? Where do you find this ?
I tested mod_jk 1.2.14 (but not stressed it) and it seems to be a good
version...
What sort of
But, in a web site, there is never only JSPs : there is a lot of static files
(images, css, js, ...)
So, if you don't have a apache in the frontend to deliver theses static files,
there is an overload for the TC server...
So, your tests stressed only light JSPs or a real site ?
and what is your
We run F5 BigIPs as our loadbalancers, and have seperated images, etc
onto another server
IE: i.domain.com for images, and www.domain.com for dynamic content.
F5 provides a feature call iRules to do the splitting between hosts
for you, but I would
NOT use this on a high traffic site.
. Is there a
1.2.14 really or did you write 14 by mistake?
Cheers,
Kerem
-Original Message-
From: Lionel Farbos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:51 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Cc: KEREM ERKAN
Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 14:55:08
.
-
Cheers,
Kerem
-Original Message-
From: Lionel Farbos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:51 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Cc: KEREM ERKAN
Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 14
So, I think your solution with F5 BigIPs-Tomcat is equivalent to the solution
with Apache/mod_jk-Tomcat
But the last is free
and I don't know the difference in performances between the 2 solutions.
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:14:01 +0200
Andrew Miehs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We run F5 BigIPs as our
Well, mod_jk 1.2.10 seems slower than 1.2.10 when stress
tested. The
tests completed in more time. I do not have the actual test
results,
because we have been using 1.2.10 for several months, maybe
I can send
them when I test 1.2.14.
I'm interested in such tests (or a link
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:27:29 +0300
KEREM ERKAN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, mod_jk 1.2.10 seems slower than 1.2.10 when stress
tested. The
tests completed in more time. I do not have the actual test
results,
because we have been using 1.2.10 for several months, maybe
I
-Original Message-
From: Lionel Farbos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 5:49 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Cc: KEREM ERKAN
Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:27:29 +0300
KEREM ERKAN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, mod_jk
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Tomcat is harder to configure and -sadly- it has a far worse documentation
than Apache (for now).
I look forward to seeing your documentation patches in Bugzilla ;)
Mark
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
Well since I don't understand German, I don't konw how he tested.
However in my stress testing which lots of static and JSPs, I found
Apache + mod_jk performance is a littlle higher than TOMCAT only. I
configured Apache with mod_cache.
So I think only handling JSPs, TC only could be better than
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 06:37:46PM +0300, Eugeny N Dzhurinsky wrote:
I have a problem with the application resources, mapped with the JkMount. For
some reason httpd server threats the content-type as text/plain, and ignores
the text/html set by tomcat.
any ideas how to get rid of that?
I believe you can specify the jvmRoute separately by using the domain
attribute, but I'm not sure I see how this would help?
Byron
-Original Message-
From: Mott Leroy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 11:03 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: mod_jk: Hot
Well, I was thinking of using something like (truncated for clarity):
# load balanced
worker.lb_traditional.type=lb
worker.lb_traditional.balance_workers=lb_worker1,lb_worker2
worker.lb_traditional.sticky_session=true
# workers 1 and 2 are load balanced
worker.lb_worker1.type=ajp13
I think having multiple load balancing workers for the same group of
target servers is not a problem.
You simply define load balancers e.g. lb1, lb2 etc.
Which load balancer is chosen is determined by your JkMount directives. So
if you have different apps app1, app2 etc. on your tomcats having
Rainer Jung wrote:
The balanced workers behind lb1, lb2 etc. are allowed to have the same
name, because each load balancer has it's own list of balanced workers
with associated attributes. I expect no problem from a clash of names of
balanced workers in different balancing workers.
I must be
Of course you are right (and for me it seems to be too late today).
So I agree: you either find out how to use different jvmRoutes in a single
instance or you try to find a workarounf with the domain attribute:
If a load balancer does not find a worker with the correct name
(=jvmRoute), it will
I dunno if it's the same in Apache 1.3, but in Apache 2.x the example
httpd.conf file has a pair of small IfModule tags showing how to run
Apache under non-root user for diff. OS's.
Basically you have to start Apache as root and it will then switch over,
or so the example file says. To do
On Aug 18, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Kyle wrote:
I dunno if it's the same in Apache 1.3, but in Apache 2.x the example
httpd.conf file has a pair of small IfModule tags showing how to run
Apache under non-root user for diff. OS's.
Basically you have to start Apache as root and it will then switch
I thought the jk2 is newer... but I can be wrong...
MC
From: Luis Torres [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: mod_jk or jk2??
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:47:42 -0500
Hello everyone,
I see
You want to use mod_jk. JK2 has been deprecated and is no longer in
active development.
On 8/3/05, MC Moisei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought the jk2 is newer... but I can be wrong...
MC
From: Luis Torres [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Hi,
Is this issue described below familiar to anyone who is really
knowledgable of how mod_jk works?
Thank you,
Edmon
Edmon Begoli wrote:
We've noticed with two versions of mod_jk we've been using (1.2.5 and
one older) that if one of the machines
hosting load balanced tomcat gets
Any thoughts?
From: David Hay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
To: tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: Re: mod_jk - multiple workers for same Tomcat instance?
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 15:00:33 -0400
Hi,
We have set up several contexts eg one
David Hay wrote:
Hi,
Is it possible to specify multiple workers for the same Tomcat instance?
Yes.
But this will impose additional load to the tomcat doubling the number
of connections from apache to mod_jk for each worker.
For ten workers you may end up with 2500 connections with
250
with different jvmRoute values to put in
workers.properties?
many thanks,
David
From: Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: Re: mod_jk - multiple workers for same Tomcat instance?
Date: Thu
Oups sorry for that, it was due to a bug in mod_bandwidth, so not really
anything to do with you guys.
For some reason the rule to limit bandwidth on files larger than 500k
produced a segfault.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
One way to do this is to declare a host in your server.xml instance
The server.xml will need to contain an entry within the engine like
Host name=myotherdomain.tld appBase=webapps unpackWARs=true
autoDeploy=true
Logger className=org.apache.catalina.logger.FileLogger
: Randall Svancara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 9:43 AM
To: Tomcat Users List; naidim
Subject: RE: mod_jk works as localhost only
Is it possible for you to send us your mod_jk configuration along with
your workers.properties(if you have one)?
Randall
-Original Message
Subject: RE: mod_jk works as localhost only
Just another side note to this thread. I was applying the SELinux
Security Policy patch to my fedora core 3 box today and it broke my
apache + mod_jk + tomcat installation. The fedora team must of changed
the Security Enhanced Linux Policy preventing mod_jk
Have you turned off iptables.
/etc/init.d/iptables stop
That will kill the firewall rules that is built in to Fedora Core3.
Randall
-Original Message-
From: naidim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 12:41 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: mod_jk works as
Guru suggested it was my server.xml. I had Host name=localhost
appBase=webapps unpackWARs=true
autoDeploy=true xmlValidation=false xmlNamespaceAware=false
So I changed Host from localhost to flex.homelinux.org and it works as
flex.homelinux.org, but not as localhost now, and still not by IP.
://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.1-doc/jk2/jk2/vhosthowto.html
- Original Message -
From: naidim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: mod_jk works as localhost only
Guru suggested it was my server.xml. I had
Is it possible for you to send us your mod_jk configuration along with
your workers.properties(if you have one)?
Randall
-Original Message-
From: naidim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 12:41 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: mod_jk works as localhost only
I'm
It's not a firewall blocking it as far as I can tell, but I tried your
suggestion with no change.
Locally, I can browse localhost, localhost:8080,
localhost:8080/jsp-examples and localhost/jsp-examples, showing that
mod_jk is working okay.
However, also locally, I can also browse by ip, ip:8080,
send me the httpd.conf and the server.xml and worker.properties ... i will
have a look ...
Regards
guru
- Original Message -
From: naidim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 7:40 PM
Subject: mod_jk works as localhost only
: Gurumoorthy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org; naidim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: mod_jk works as localhost only
send me the httpd.conf and the server.xml and worker.properties ... i will
have a look ...
Regards
My apologies...
I should have added that I only get this error when the server comes under load
and even then the errors are intermittent.
-SB
-Original Message-
From: BATCHELOR, SCOTT (CONTRACTOR) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 2:12 PM
To: Tomcat User List
Can anyone tell me if they see similar behavior, or if they see
appropriate error and info messages with JkLogLevel?
Bill S.
-Original Message-
From: Shaffer, William (KnowledgeN)
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 3:48 PM
To: tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: mod_jk jkloglevel not
Try to point your documentroot to point somewhere else and try ...
-Original Message-
From: Stanislav Bauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 May 2005 08:46
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: mod_jk shows source - Apache 2.0.53 mod_jk 1.2.12
Hi,
I'm trying to connect Apache with TC to
No its no a problem of finding the right file. It shows the right one,
i.e. index.jsp but it shows the source and does not execute it. It seems
to be for dynamic pages. For instance I have a response.Redirect() in
index.jsp.
SB
Raghupathy,Gurumoorthy wrote:
Try to point your documentroot to
Hi Stanislav,
Stanislav Bauer schrieb:
I'm trying to connect Apache with TC to serve www.domain.com for
instance. I have a
VirtualHost
ServerName www.domain.com
DocumentRoot /.../webapps/domain
JkMount /domain worker1
JkMount /domain/* worker1
JkAutoAlias
Can you tell me the listing of the /.../webapps/domain directory ?
Regards
Guru
-Original Message-
From: Stanislav Bauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 May 2005 09:08
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: mod_jk shows source - Apache 2.0.53 mod_jk 1.2.12
No its no a problem
OK, which information would help you. Is it necessary to point the
DocumentRoot somwhere else? I thought it doesnt matter where the sources
lie.
Btw you are right, I point DocumentRoot directly to webapps under TC, so
I dont have to have it twice.
Thanx
SB
Lutz Zetzsche wrote:
Hi Stanislav,
PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 May 2005 09:08
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: mod_jk shows source - Apache 2.0.53 mod_jk 1.2.12
No its no a problem of finding the right file. It shows the right one,
i.e. index.jsp but it shows the source and does not execute it. It seems
to be for dynamic pages
, if for instance I send everything to tomcat by using
Any suggestions?
Regards
John Boocock
-Original Message-
From: Lutz Zetzsche [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 May 2005 09:13
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: mod_jk shows source - Apache 2.0.53 mod_jk 1.2.12
Hi Stanislav,
Stanislav
Hi Stanislav,
Stanislav Bauer schrieb:
In apaches httpd.conf I also added index.jsp to the DirectoryIndex.
oh, bad idea!
As Apache shouldn't serve jsp pages itself, you shouldn't instruct Apache
to look for an index.jsp in case of a request like
http://www.domain.com/dir/.
Remove index.jsp
Hmm, when I remove index.jsp then I get just a directory listing.
Concerning the mining, how should the structure be then? Where should
DocumentRoot normaly point to?
I thought it works that way:
1) Take the pages from DocumentRoot
2) If it is *.jsp pass it to TC and TC will execute them
3)
Hi John,
Boocock, John (CSS) schrieb:
If I go to www.domain.com/context/index.jsp I get a page as expected
If I go to www.domain.com//context/index.jsp I get the source code, also
this isn't just on one context or the index.jsp file, we run quite a few
contexts and it consistently displays
Maybe it would be sufficient to write JkMount differently but I dont
know how for matching http://www.domain.com
The examples seam to be written just for test scenarios, but not if you
arrive to the server with http://www.domain.com
Thanks
SB
Lutz Zetzsche wrote:
Hi Stanislav,
Stanislav Bauer
Boocock
-Original Message-
From: Lutz Zetzsche [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 May 2005 10:21
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: mod_jk shows source - Apache 2.0.53 mod_jk 1.2.12
Hi John,
Boocock, John (CSS) schrieb:
If I go to www.domain.com/context/index.jsp I get a page as expected
Hi Stanislav,
Stanislav Bauer schrieb:
Hmm, when I remove index.jsp then I get just a directory listing.
Concerning the mining, how should the structure be then? Where should
DocumentRoot normaly point to?
I thought it works that way:
1) Take the pages from DocumentRoot
2) If it is *.jsp
OK, First thanks for the patience.
I have now a config that seams to work but:
1) I have a second domain pointing to the same IP, say www.domain2.com
2) I put JkMount /domain/* worker1 into IfModule mod_jk.c, where I
have also JkWorkersFile aso
3) Now if I write www.domain2.com/domain I get the
Hi Stanislav,
Stanislav Bauer schrieb:
I have now a config that seams to work but:
1) I have a second domain pointing to the same IP, say www.domain2.com
2) I put JkMount /domain/* worker1 into IfModule mod_jk.c, where I
have also JkWorkersFile aso
3) Now if I write www.domain2.com/domain I
So I'm working now with just one domain :-), say www.domain.com. But
instead to go directly to the jsp-webapp I have to write
www.domain.com/contextname/ with virtualhost like this:
VirtualHost
ServerName www.domain.com
JkMount /contextname/* worker1
/VirtualHost
Then the JSP-pages work
Hi Stanislav,
Stanislav Bauer schrieb:
So I'm working now with just one domain :-), say www.domain.com. But
instead to go directly to the jsp-webapp I have to write
www.domain.com/contextname/ with virtualhost like this:
VirtualHost
ServerName www.domain.com
JkMount /contextname/*
J. W. Ballantine wrote:
I'm trying to build mod_jk 1.2.11 on a solaris 2.8
system and it fails with:
The configuration command is:
./configure --with-apxs=/local/APACHE/Apache2/bin/apxs --enable-jni
--with-java-home=/a2/JAVA/java --with-java-platform=2
jni will not work anyhow on any unix
I got it partially working,
Listener className=org.apache.catalina.startup.UserConfig
directoryName=public_html
userClass=org.apache.catalina.startup.PasswdUserDatabase/
added in server.xml shows local users dirs. but local defined ones only.
Is there anyway to got user directories out from
Torsten Krah wrote:
Hello,
is there any chance, to get mod_jk so configured, that it can handle jsp
files, servlets ( complete webapps ) in the apache mod_userdir
directory?
I want to have ~/pubic_html/*.jsp interpreted by tomcat but it seems
mod_jk isnt able to handle it, am i right or wrong?
Any
In order to get Tomcat to handle requests as in
http://www.xyz.com/~username
you need to use the Tomcat UserConfig class and then have apache pass off all
requests to .jsp to tomcat with mod_jk.
Details to use UserConfig in tomcat are at a few places including
Andrey Grebnev wrote:
Hello All,
I try to use:
- Apache 1.3.33 under Windows XP SP2
- mod_jk-1.2.10-apache-1.3.33.so
IfModule mod_jk.c
JkWorkerProperty worker.list=ajp13w
JkWorkerProperty worker.ajp13w.type=ajp13
JkWorkerProperty worker.ajp13w.host=localhost
I thought that for apache 1.3, the modules go in the libexec
directory, and if so then your statement above should look like:
LoadModule jk_module libexec/mod_jk.so
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:10:42 +0100 (CET), Christoph Kukulies
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I installed apache 1.13.33 and tomcat
From: Robert r. Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: mod_jk + ssl on a virtual host.
When connecting, I can access the web application via HTTPS;
however Tomcat seems unaware that the connection is secure
Have you set secure=true in the connector entry in server.xml that you're
using
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Robert r. Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: mod_jk + ssl on a virtual host.
When connecting, I can access the web application via HTTPS;
however Tomcat seems unaware that the connection is secure
Have you set secure=true in the connector entry in
No one responded to my previous question, so let me try again.
Is anyone here running Tomcat 5.0.x + mod_jk + Apache and downloading
large files through it with normal a throughput?
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, Mikhail Kruk wrote:
apache 2.0.53
tomcat 5.0.29
mod_jk 1.2.8, worker configured to do
Why don't you JkUnMount /download_dir your_worker?
-Original Message-
From: Mikhail Kruk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March 9, 2005 4:46 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: mod_jk: download speed problem
No one responded to my previous question, so let me try again. Is anyone
here
Mikhail Kruk wrote:
No one responded to my previous question, so let me try again.
Is anyone here running Tomcat 5.0.x + mod_jk + Apache and downloading
large files through it with normal a throughput?
Server Software:Apache/2.0.53
Server Hostname:localhost
Server Port:
: March 9, 2005 4:46 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: mod_jk: download speed problem
No one responded to my previous question, so let me try again. Is anyone
here running Tomcat 5.0.x + mod_jk + Apache and downloading
large files through it with normal a throughput?
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005
Document Path: /servlets-examples/test.jpg
And this goes through mod_jk, right?
Document Length:1513456 bytes
This is on WIN32, also localhost.
I've tried on RH9, SLES8.2 and FreeBSD 4.11 and found no slowdown.
Can you post your config files?
What did you use to get this
workers.tomcat_home=/usr/local/tomcat
workers.java_home=/usr/local/j2sdk
ps=/
worker.list=worker1
worker.worker1.type=ajp13
worker.worker1.host=localhost
worker.worker1.port=8009
#worker.worker1.lbfactor=50
#worker.worker1.cachesize=10
#worker.worker1.cache_timeout=600
You need to set a content type.
-Tim
Jörg Lindner wrote:
Hello All,
an ugly effect let me post this message in the list in hope of help.
I run tomcat 5.0.28 connected per mod_jk (ajp13) in Apache 2.
In Apache the mapping from webapp-URL to the servlet seems to work. My servlet
get called.
But
I think you need to set the content type for your response. Try something like:
res.setContentType(text/html);
where res is the HttpServletResponse.
Jay
-Original Message-
From: Jörg Lindner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 12:26 PM
To:
Thank you, it works now with specified ContentType :-)
Jörg
Am Dienstag, 1. März 2005 19:28 schrieb Tim Funk:
You need to set a content type.
-Tim
Jörg Lindner wrote:
Hello All,
an ugly effect let me post this message in the list in hope of help.
I run tomcat 5.0.28 connected
Thanks much!
It works now with the set ContentType :-)
Jörg
Am Dienstag, 1. März 2005 19:42 schrieb Burgess, Jay S:
I think you need to set the content type for your response. Try something
like:
res.setContentType(text/html);
where res is the HttpServletResponse.
Jay
No one any clues on this issue? I've got about 3000 connections hanging
around in CLOSE_WAIT now. Especially that 1 byte hanging in the receive
buffer keeps me puzzled.
Hi,
i have the following problem with mod_jk from tomcat-connectors (1.2.5 -
1.2.8) including 1.2.9 (from cvs).
Michael Stiller wrote:
No one any clues on this issue? I've got about 3000 connections hanging
around in CLOSE_WAIT now. Especially that 1 byte hanging in the receive
buffer keeps me puzzled.
Did you tried the latest CVS HEAD?
It contains the hard close socket by disabling lingering.
Further
On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 11:19 +0100, Mladen Turk wrote:
Michael Stiller wrote:
No one any clues on this issue? I've got about 3000 connections hanging
around in CLOSE_WAIT now. Especially that 1 byte hanging in the receive
buffer keeps me puzzled.
Did you tried the latest CVS HEAD?
I
Michael Stiller wrote:
I tried something i checked out from cvs last friday.
Use more recent :)
The version is tomcat-connectors 1.2.9.
The OS ist Fedora Core 3.
Seems that I miss the OS.
It contains the hard close socket by disabling lingering.
Where may i learn about the hard close patch.
1 - 100 of 1079 matches
Mail list logo
