[AOLSERVER] [ aolserver-Support Requests-480000 ] Create a virtual server on a second IP
Support Requests item #48, was opened at 2001-11-09 05:39 You can respond by visiting: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=203152aid=48group_id=3152 Category: Configuration: First-Time Startup Group: aolserver3_2 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Danny Lieberman (dannyl50) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Create a virtual server on a second IP Initial Comment: I am running open acs with AOL Server 3.2 i have an Intel box with 2 IP addresses and I want to assign the second IP to another virtual server servicing another domain. it is maddening - but such a simple task for iis or apache seems to elude me when it comes to AOLserver. I found an article about doing it with one IP address - but i dont have a problem with assigning a separate IP to the second virtual web server. Do i have to install a second instance of AOLserver and ACS? that is a pretty heavy load to put on the machine... It seems to me that a separate directory under the nsadmin $HOME with a separate nsd.tcl pointing to the correct domain SHOULD work - but like i say - I know i MUST be missing something thx!! danny Lieberman -- You can respond by visiting: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=203152aid=48group_id=3152
Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLSERVER Digest - 6 Nov 2001 to 8 Nov 2001 (#2001-280)
Mike, I found the problem almost right after I sent the mail. It's Solaris 2.7, there's no core file and the server keeps running. It was a problem with the Sybase proxy daemon. Thanks, Kevin In a message dated 11/9/2001 12:04:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Run-time exception error; current exception: RWBoundsErrNo handler for exception. Which platform are you running on? Is there a core file to examine? Are you exec'ing another app from this thread that could cause this error? Mike Kevin Lawver Software Engineer | Studio@AOL It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up. - Muhammad Ali
Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4 - Win32 not supported?
Microsoft will always own the NT server market and there will be a miniscule following for AS on NT. A survey would likely show that the number of active AS users (users, not IP addresses) is already tiny compared to Apache and IIS. As a product with a smallish audience, it makes a lot of sense to focus on doing the best thing for 99% of the userbase rather than investing in things that will benefit 1% of the userbase and at the same time potentially harm the 99% because of added complexity, less time to test on the Unix platforms because of testing on Win platforms, more tech support required for Win platforms because of less use/less testing/fewer users beating on it, etc. Not trying to start a flame war here - I know everyone has their likes and dislikes when it comes to computing platforms. I'd really like to see a survey done of how many active AOLServer users there are, what platforms they're using, and so on. Maybe I'll get around to doing it one of these days. I think the results would make decisions like these crystal clear. Maybe I'll have time to do it one of these daze... Jim Cygwin is a great toolkit, and I heartily recommend it to anyone who is used to working on Unix. But I would like to see AOLserver 4 continue to run natively under Win32. In addition to Cygwin taking up disk space and adding another layer of debugging / installation / configuration complexity, there is a performance penalty - not something I'm excited about introducing into my web server. I don't want to seem ungrateful - I am indebted to Jim, Kris, and the rest of the AOLserver community for their fantastic work. I just hate seeing good features go away. Anyway, I will try to build AOLserver 4b2 on top of Cygwin sometime soon. In the meantime, please email me if you are interested in experimenting with this. Thanks, Jamie At 02:06 PM 11/8/2001 -0600, Rob Mayoff wrote: This was discussed in the last weekly chat. Yes, the plan is to stop supporting Win32 in AOLserver. Reasons given, as I recall, were that it took a lot of Jim's time to implement/maintain and added significant complexity to some parts of the code, such as the threads package (especially since he's now considering supporting only pthreads, not other random proprietary threads APIs). A suggestion was floated that AOLserver could perhaps run on top of the cygwin package, which implements many Unix APIs and commands under Windows. If someone wishes to port AOLserver to run on cygwin, and it doesn't require many changes, then I suspect that Jim would accept the patches for that.
Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4 - Win32 not supported?
The decision to drop Win32 has been kicking around for some time now. My interpretation of the chat two weeks ago was that dropping Win32 support should make it easier to make AOLserver more robust and maybe faster in the UNIX environments. It will definitely make it an easier application to support. For the *nix users, that's a great win, and the large reason I support dropping Win32 support. That said, I'd love to see a cygwin port, and perhaps that's something that our win32 community can strive to provide. Jerry Jerry Asher [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1678 Shattuck Avenue Suite 161 Tel: (510) 549-2980 Berkeley, CA 94709 Fax: (877) 311-8688
[AOLSERVER] [ aolserver-Support Requests-480111 ] separate daemon or inetd on solaris
Support Requests item #480111, was opened at 2001-11-09 09:52 You can respond by visiting: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=203152aid=480111group_id=3152 Category: Configuration: Other Group: aolserver3_3_1 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Gabriel Borrageiro (gborrageiro) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: separate daemon or inetd on solaris Initial Comment: Hi there, What is your recommendation of running nsd, as a stand- alone daemon or wrapped within inetd on a solaris 8 sparc? The core areas of interest for me are performance, reliability and security. Kind Regards, Gabriel -- You can respond by visiting: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailatid=203152aid=480111group_id=3152
Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4 - Win32 not supported?
As a user of a mixed NT/Linux environment, the decision to drop Win32 is a bit of a bummer for me and my employers. We're now left with IIS and maybe Apache. But the group's logic makes sense, especially the part about having a miniscule user base in the Win32 world, and that situation continuing into the future. As I said we are also getting into Linux, so we'll be looking for you all there... -- Mark Hubbard: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Microsoft Certified Professional Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 problem. (quote shamelessly lifted from Mr. Virden) -Original Message- From: Jerry Asher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, November 09, 2001 11:17 AM Subject: Re: AOLserver 4 - Win32 not supported? The decision to drop Win32 has been kicking around for some time now. My interpretation of the chat two weeks ago was that dropping Win32 support should make it easier to make AOLserver more robust and maybe faster in the UNIX environments. It will definitely make it an easier application to support. For the *nix users, that's a great win, and the large reason I support dropping Win32 support. That said, I'd love to see a cygwin port, and perhaps that's something that our win32 community can strive to provide. Jerry Jerry Asher [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1678 Shattuck Avenue Suite 161 Tel: (510) 549-2980 Berkeley, CA 94709 Fax: (877) 311-8688
Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4 - Win32 not supported?
Jerry Asher wrote: The decision to drop Win32 has been kicking around for some time now. My interpretation of the chat two weeks ago was that dropping Win32 support should make it easier to make AOLserver more robust and maybe faster in the UNIX environments. It will definitely make it an easier application to support. the biggest down side is that it's harder to sell aolserver if you can't say oh yeah, it runs on windows if you need to deploy it there too.. it makes AOLserver seem that much more irrelevant to the unwashed masses.. i think the real competitor to aolserver is apache and if apache runs on windows but aolserver does'nt.. it becomes a harder sell.. -mike
Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4 - Win32 not supported?
- Original Message - From: Mike Hoegeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 11:21 AM Subject: Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4 - Win32 not supported? Jerry Asher wrote: The decision to drop Win32 has been kicking around for some time now. My interpretation of the chat two weeks ago was that dropping Win32 support should make it easier to make AOLserver more robust and maybe faster in the UNIX environments. It will definitely make it an easier application to support. the biggest down side is that it's harder to sell aolserver if you can't say oh yeah, it runs on windows if you need to deploy it there too.. it makes AOLserver seem that much more irrelevant to the unwashed masses.. i think the real competitor to aolserver is apache and if apache runs on windows but aolserver does'nt.. it becomes a harder sell.. But the real point is that AS isn't a product.. its a piece of software that we are reaping the benifits of using.. and as a result they have to do the stuff that makes the best sense for them... we are the ones that have to figure out how to best leverage what they do.. -- Patrick Spence, MIS Mayor Pharmaceutical Labs/Regency Medical Research, Ltd. 2401 South 24th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.vitamist.com
Re: [AOLSERVER] AOLserver 4 - Win32 not supported?
Patrick Spence wrote: masses.. i think the real competitor to aolserver is apache and if apache runs on windows but aolserver does'nt.. it becomes a harder sell.. But the real point is that AS isn't a product.. its a piece of software that we are reaping the benifits of using.. and as a result they have to do the stuff that makes the best sense for them... we are the ones that have to figure out how to best leverage what they do.. hey, i'm not expecting that AOL in any way accomodate me, just putting in my two cents worth to allow them get a feel for what people think of recent developments. otherwise, we might as well call this list AOLserver_announcements instead of AOLserver_Discussion... -- Patrick Spence, MIS Mayor Pharmaceutical Labs/Regency Medical Research, Ltd. 2401 South 24th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.vitamist.com -- Mike Hoegeman Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: 805-279-7306
Re: [AOLSERVER] nsopenssl destroying conn too soon?
Actually, looking at your log output, your conn is being cut immediately. Still need to know what version of nsopenssl you're running. Ian, what version of nsopenssl are you using? Can you time how long before your conn is cut? /s. On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:50:50 -0800, Ian Harding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have nsopenssl working fine with one exception. If the page takes 'too long' to serve up, nsopenssl closes the connection too soon. I have read what I can find and can't fix it. Any ideas? log snippet... [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Notice: dbdrv: opening database 'postgres:localhost:543... [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Notice: nspostgres: opening 'planning' on 'localhost' [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Notice: nspostgres: opened connection to 'localhost:543... [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Notice: dbinit: sql (localhost:5432:planning): 'select *... [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Debug: nsopenssl: SockClose [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Debug: nsopenssl: destroying conn (0x83c6978) [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Debug: nsopenssl: done destroying conn Ian A. Harding Programmer/Analyst II Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department (253) 798-3549 mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [AOLSERVER] nsopenssl destroying conn too soon?
1.0. It lets small pages get out, just not ones that drag their feet talking to the database. uname -a NetBSD planning.local 1.5 NetBSD 1.5 (GENERIC) #1: Sun Nov 19 21:42:11 MET 2000 fvdl@sushi:/work/trees/netbsd-1-5/sys/arch/i386/compile/GENERIC i386 pkg_info | grep nsopenssl nsopenssl-1.0 Secure sockets implementation for aolserver Ian A. Harding Programmer/Analyst II Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department (253) 798-3549 mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/09/01 11:57AM Actually, looking at your log output, your conn is being cut immediately. Still need to know what version of nsopenssl you're running. Ian, what version of nsopenssl are you using? Can you time how long before your conn is cut? /s. On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:50:50 -0800, Ian Harding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have nsopenssl working fine with one exception. If the page takes 'too long' to serve up, nsopenssl closes the connection too soon. I have read what I can find and can't fix it. Any ideas? log snippet... [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Notice: dbdrv: opening database 'postgres:localhost:543... [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Notice: nspostgres: opening 'planning' on 'localhost' [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Notice: nspostgres: opened connection to 'localhost:543... [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Notice: dbinit: sql (localhost:5432:planning): 'select *... [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Debug: nsopenssl: SockClose [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Debug: nsopenssl: destroying conn (0x83c6978) [08/Nov/2001:21:01:20][28846.43][-conn3-] Debug: nsopenssl: done destroying conn Ian A. Harding Programmer/Analyst II Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department (253) 798-3549 mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
