[rt-users] Question about Command By Mail - Something is not right :/
Hi there, just a quick question regarding the 'command by mail' extension. I am working with someone offsite that is using a non-RT ticketing system and they currently send email to us for certain tickets. We are trying to ensure that all tickets go into our ticketing system so I am working with their in-house guy to have him mail it in a format that command by mail will work with. If we just send the ticket from an email program it works fine, Requestor, Owner, et al. are properly set in RT. There are 2 possible queue's for the ticket to go to but what we get is that it goes to the incorrect queue and none of the information gets set for the ticket. When I look at the ticket in RT, in the comments section, this is what I see: (Copied and pasted) Owner: remote_Sites_username Status: open Requestor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Queue: queue_for_remote_site TimeWorked: 00:00:13 RealName - Testy Testerton HomePhone - 555-555- City - Some City State - State Password - None Problem - Testing instead of Solution - Testing. Which is exactly what I asked them to send, the way I asked them to send it. The resulting HTML displayed in RT if I view source is: div class=messagebody Owner: remote_Sites_usernamebrStatus: openbrRequestor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] brQueue: GTCbrTimeWorked: 00:00:13brRealName - Testy TestertonbrHomePhone - 555-555-brCity - Some CitybrState - StatebrPassword - NonebrProblem - Testing br instead of brbrSolution - Testing. and it is not in their queue and is assigned (Requestor) as their system user. We also tried a different way with the same results, but with different HTML code showing when I view source. Instead of br it has br / Since it works perfectly when we just send it via any old mail program, can anyone tell me what is going wrong here? Here is what is in my RT log relating to one of the created tickets via email. I would love to provide more information if possible as well: [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15870 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15871 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15872 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15873 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15874 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to prepare scrips for transaction #15874 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:171) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Found 3 scrips (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/ Scrips_Overlay.pm:365) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Got To Stage 1 ((eval 3880):1) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to commit scrips for transaction #15874 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:180) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [info]: [EMAIL PROTECTED] #960/15874 - Scrip 4 Scrip #04 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm: 252) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [info]: [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm:283) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: We found a part. we want to record it. (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm:443) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: We found an attachment. we want to not record it. (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm:440) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Guessed encoding: utf8 (/opt/rt3/ lib/RT/I18N.pm:397) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Guessed encoding: utf8 (/opt/rt3/ lib/RT/I18N.pm:397) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15875 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Got to Stage 2 ((eval 3910):2) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Conditions NOT Met, condition is:Create ((eval 3910):67) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [info]: Ticket 960 created in queue 'Email Support' by gtctechsupport (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Ticket_Overlay.pm:756) The Got TO Stage 1, Got to Stage 2 and Conditions NOT Met lines are from a scrip that I use, but that should not break anything in creating the ticket since it works fine when they, or I send a ticket with the exact same (or very similar) information from any standard mail app. I am a bit perplexed and any help would be appreciated. Regards, Greg Evans Hood Canal Communications (360) 898-2481 ext.212 ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Question about Command By Mail - Something is not right :/
Here is a bit more info from my /var/log/httpd/error_log [Tue Mar 18 17:33:30 2008] [error]: Couldn't create ticket from message with commands, fallback to standard mailgate. Error: Invalid value for status (/opt/rt3/local/lib/RT/Interface/Email/ Filter/TakeAction.pm:504) [Tue Mar 18 17:33:30 2008] [crit]: Couldn't create ticket from message with commands, fallback to standard mailgate. Error: Invalid value for status (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Interface/Email.pm:243) [Tue Mar 18 12:52:26 2008] [error] [Mason] File does not exist: /opt/ rt3/share/html/favicon.ico [Tue Mar 18 12:52:26 2008] [error] [Mason] File does not exist: /opt/ rt3/share/html/favicon.ico [Tue Mar 18 19:52:34 2008] [error]: FAILED LOGIN for gtctechsupport from 64.184.140.29 (/opt/rt3/share/html/autohandler:251) [Tue Mar 18 19:57:48 2008] [error]: FAILED LOGIN for gtc from 64.184.140.29 (/opt/rt3/share/html/autohandler:251) The status on this ticket was open (sans quotes) and I copied and pasted what showed up incorrectly from when they tried to submit it and emailed it into the system from Apple's Mail.app and from Microsoft Outlook 2003 and it worked properly both times. Regards, Greg Evans Internet Support Hood Canal Communications (360) 898-2481 ext.212 On Mar 18, 2008, at 11:34 PM, Greg Evans wrote: Hi there, just a quick question regarding the 'command by mail' extension. I am working with someone offsite that is using a non-RT ticketing system and they currently send email to us for certain tickets. We are trying to ensure that all tickets go into our ticketing system so I am working with their in-house guy to have him mail it in a format that command by mail will work with. If we just send the ticket from an email program it works fine, Requestor, Owner, et al. are properly set in RT. There are 2 possible queue's for the ticket to go to but what we get is that it goes to the incorrect queue and none of the information gets set for the ticket. When I look at the ticket in RT, in the comments section, this is what I see: (Copied and pasted) Owner: remote_Sites_username Status: open Requestor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Queue: queue_for_remote_site TimeWorked: 00:00:13 RealName - Testy Testerton HomePhone - 555-555- City - Some City State - State Password - None Problem - Testing instead of Solution - Testing. Which is exactly what I asked them to send, the way I asked them to send it. The resulting HTML displayed in RT if I view source is: div class=messagebody Owner: remote_Sites_usernamebrStatus: openbrRequestor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] brQueue: GTCbrTimeWorked: 00:00:13brRealName - Testy TestertonbrHomePhone - 555-555-brCity - Some CitybrState - StatebrPassword - NonebrProblem - Testing br instead of brbrSolution - Testing. and it is not in their queue and is assigned (Requestor) as their system user. We also tried a different way with the same results, but with different HTML code showing when I view source. Instead of br it has br / Since it works perfectly when we just send it via any old mail program, can anyone tell me what is going wrong here? Here is what is in my RT log relating to one of the created tickets via email. I would love to provide more information if possible as well: [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15870 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15871 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15872 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15873 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to think about scrips for transaction #15874 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:167) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to prepare scrips for transaction #15874 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:171) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Found 3 scrips (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/ Scrips_Overlay.pm:365) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Got To Stage 1 ((eval 3880):1) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: About to commit scrips for transaction #15874 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Transaction_Overlay.pm:180) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [info]: [EMAIL PROTECTED] #960/15874 - Scrip 4 Scrip #04 (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/ SendEmail.pm:252) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [info]: [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm: 283) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: We found a part. we want to record it. (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm:443) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: We found an attachment. we want to not record it. (/opt/rt3/lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm:440) [Wed Mar 19 02:40:17 2008] [debug]: Guessed encoding: utf8 (/opt/rt3/ lib/RT/I18N.pm:397) [Wed Mar 19
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
The vast amount of data could be due to spam. I set up a script which regularly (daily) searches for spam and the users automatically created by it. It then runs Shredder on the list I built. This is made easier by creating a spam only queue into which all incoming spam is placed. Additionally, we've instituted a method of preventing non-authorized users from creating tickets. We have a script which pulls the email addresses of our customers employees from our customer database. It then builds a procmail script. If the email address is listed in the procmail script the incoming email is passed to rtx-mailgate. If the email address doesn't exist in the list they get a bounce back. This eliminated about 75% of our spam problem. The other 25% was from our other public facing queue to which security and abuse issues are reported. These emails are placed in our _SPAM queue on which the above clean-up script runs. It doesn't always get everything because it isn't configured to handle Bcc and Cc addresses but the requestor address is always groomed. The emails in that queue are marked as deleted and Shredder then grooms out all deleted emails. On another note, we just installed a Barracuda system which has been a blessing. The clean-up script went from a daily scrubbing of between 150-250 emails and users to between 0 and 20. Mathew Richard Ellis wrote: Hi Ruslan, Really appreciate the help on this. I'd love to find out why we are seeing such odd results: 298 ticket owners when their are only 88 active users 1.5 million rows of data when we only have 9983 ticks as of this morning. Really odd Thanks Richard -- Keep up with me and what I'm up to: http://theillien.blogspot.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] zabbix RT
Hi to all, i'm using Zabbix for a while now and i'm looking for some perl script which will be called from zabbix when trigger come true or false and place a ticket directly to queue. I'm runnig RT3 and Zabbix on the same machine. Thanks in advance. -- Toth Milan [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://toth-online.com +421/905/144 269 ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] New install, weird layount (CSS?)
In RT_SiteConfig.pm you can change it back by using Set($WebDefaultStylesheet, '3.4-compat'); Chaim Rieger wrote: Grant Christensen wrote: I was comparing to: http://www.bestpractical.com/images/screenshots/rt/3.0/home.gif nope, thats the old one you is all good ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] zabbix RT
There are some scrips and templates on the wiki that work with nagios messages. You could probbaly adapt them for Zabbix. http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/AutoCloseOnNagiosRecoveryMessages http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/SendNagiosAlert Toth Milan wrote: Hi to all, i'm using Zabbix for a while now and i'm looking for some perl script which will be called from zabbix when trigger come true or false and place a ticket directly to queue. I'm runnig RT3 and Zabbix on the same machine. Thanks in advance. -- Toth Milan [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://toth-online.com +421/905/144 269 ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] zabbix RT
Toth Milan wrote: Hi to all, i'm using Zabbix for a while now and i'm looking for some perl script which will be called from zabbix when trigger come true or false and place a ticket directly to queue. I'm runnig RT3 and Zabbix on the same machine. Thanks in advance. You could just have zabbix send an email to RT? Thats what I do at least. Charlie ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
Hi Ruslan, here's the two sets of results. Thanks Richard Ruslan Zakirov wrote: Ok, I have an idea how to fix that problem Here is new file for testing that will give me more info to find the best way to fixing this. We're really close. You can run it using: mysql -t -u root -ppassword rt3 ../search_possible_owners.mysql.sql test.res As a first step to fix it you can create the following index on Groups table: CREATE INDEX RUZ_Groups1 ON Groups(Domain, Type, id); Please, run commands from the attachment twice before indexing and after. Thank you for the feedback. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Richard Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ruslan, Really appreciate the help on this. I'd love to find out why we are seeing such odd results: 298 ticket owners when their are only 88 active users 1.5 million rows of data when we only have 9983 ticks as of this morning. Really odd Thanks Richard [snip] ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | main | range | PRIMARY,Users3 | PRIMARY | 4 | NULL | 1317 | Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | Principals_1 | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3.main.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | CachedGroupMembers_2 | ref| DisGrouMem,GrouMem,group1,member1 | member1 | 5 | rt3.Principals_1.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4| range | ACL1 | ACL1| 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index; Distinct | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | eq_ref | PRIMARY,Groups1,Groups2 | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3.CachedGroupMembers_2.GroupId |1 | Using where; Distinct| ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ +---+---+ | PrincipalType | COUNT(id) | +---+---+ | Group | 298 | +---+---+ ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4 | range | ACL1 | ACL1 | 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index | ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ ++ | COUNT(Groups_3.id) | ++ | 0 | ++ ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4| range | ACL1| ACL1| 54 | NULL| 296 | Using where; Using index | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | ref | Groups1,Groups2 | Groups2 | 67 | rt3.ACL_4.PrincipalType | 1345 | Using where; Using index | ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4 | range | ACL1 | ACL1 | 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index | ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 04:22:46PM +, Richard Ellis wrote: Hi Ruslan, here's the two sets of results. FWIW, from your response to ruslan, it _does_ look like your hand-added group1 index was messing up the query planner. It's on GroupId, while we already had an index on GroupId, MemberId. Thanks Richard Ruslan Zakirov wrote: Ok, I have an idea how to fix that problem Here is new file for testing that will give me more info to find the best way to fixing this. We're really close. You can run it using: mysql -t -u root -ppassword rt3 ../search_possible_owners.mysql.sql test.res As a first step to fix it you can create the following index on Groups table: CREATE INDEX RUZ_Groups1 ON Groups(Domain, Type, id); Please, run commands from the attachment twice before indexing and after. Thank you for the feedback. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Richard Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ruslan, Really appreciate the help on this. I'd love to find out why we are seeing such odd results: 298 ticket owners when their are only 88 active users 1.5 million rows of data when we only have 9983 ticks as of this morning. Really odd Thanks Richard [snip] ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | main | range | PRIMARY,Users3 | PRIMARY | 4 | NULL | 1317 | Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | Principals_1 | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3.main.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | CachedGroupMembers_2 | ref| DisGrouMem,GrouMem,group1,member1 | member1 | 5 | rt3.Principals_1.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4| range | ACL1 | ACL1| 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index; Distinct | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | eq_ref | PRIMARY,Groups1,Groups2 | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3.CachedGroupMembers_2.GroupId |1 | Using where; Distinct| ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ +---+---+ | PrincipalType | COUNT(id) | +---+---+ | Group | 298 | +---+---+ ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4 | range | ACL1 | ACL1 | 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index | ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ ++ | COUNT(Groups_3.id) | ++ | 0 | ++ ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4| range | ACL1| ACL1| 54 | NULL| 296 | Using where; Using index | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | ref | Groups1,Groups2 | Groups2 | 67 | rt3.ACL_4.PrincipalType | 1345 | Using where; Using index | ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra|
Re: [rt-users] SOT: high performance web cache for RT
On 3/6/2008 7:37 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: Sven Sternberger wrote: I found a very interesting software project, which boost my RT test instance. http://varnish.projects.linpro.no/ due to the nature of cache systems it is not working with https traffic, but nevertheless It could be helpful for a lot of environments. And I will try a combined solution with pound and varnish, may this will work. We use exactly this with RT. Following up on a thread from a couple of weeks ago. I'm curious as to how something like Varnish can help with what is, essentially, dynamically-generated content? -- Regards, joe ~~~ | Joe Casadonte | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |~~~|~~ | | Oracle Transportation Management | 1016 West Ninth Avenue | |~~~| Suite 300| | 610-491-3315| King of Prussia, PA 19406 | ~~~ ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
Hi Jesse, Thanks. To the best of my knowledge nobody has added any indexes to the database on anything except what RT patches apply on each upgrade. This DB was originally 3.0 and has been upgraded more times than I want to think about over the years to 3.6.6 now :) Richard Jesse Vincent wrote: On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 04:22:46PM +, Richard Ellis wrote: Hi Ruslan, here's the two sets of results. FWIW, from your response to ruslan, it _does_ look like your hand-added group1 index was messing up the query planner. It's on GroupId, while we already had an index on GroupId, MemberId. Thanks Richard Ruslan Zakirov wrote: Ok, I have an idea how to fix that problem Here is new file for testing that will give me more info to find the best way to fixing this. We're really close. You can run it using: mysql -t -u root -ppassword rt3 ../search_possible_owners.mysql.sql test.res As a first step to fix it you can create the following index on Groups table: CREATE INDEX RUZ_Groups1 ON Groups(Domain, Type, id); Please, run commands from the attachment twice before indexing and after. Thank you for the feedback. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Richard Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ruslan, Really appreciate the help on this. I'd love to find out why we are seeing such odd results: 298 ticket owners when their are only 88 active users 1.5 million rows of data when we only have 9983 ticks as of this morning. Really odd Thanks Richard [snip] ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | main | range | PRIMARY,Users3 | PRIMARY | 4 | NULL | 1317 | Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | Principals_1 | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3.main.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | CachedGroupMembers_2 | ref| DisGrouMem,GrouMem,group1,member1 | member1 | 5 | rt3.Principals_1.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4| range | ACL1 | ACL1| 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index; Distinct | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | eq_ref | PRIMARY,Groups1,Groups2 | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3.CachedGroupMembers_2.GroupId |1 | Using where; Distinct| ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ +---+---+ | PrincipalType | COUNT(id) | +---+---+ | Group | 298 | +---+---+ ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4 | range | ACL1 | ACL1 | 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index | ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ ++ | COUNT(Groups_3.id) | ++ | 0 | ++ ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4| range | ACL1| ACL1| 54 | NULL| 296 | Using where; Using index | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | ref | Groups1,Groups2 | Groups2 | 67 | rt3.ACL_4.PrincipalType | 1345 | Using where; Using index |
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 04:38:12PM +, Richard Ellis wrote: Hi Jesse, Thanks. To the best of my knowledge nobody has added any indexes to the database on anything except what RT patches apply on each upgrade. This DB was originally 3.0 and has been upgraded more times than I want to think about over the years to 3.6.6 now :) That index doesn't follow RT's standard index naming/capitalization scheme. Someone may have gone behind your back ;) Richard Jesse Vincent wrote: On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 04:22:46PM +, Richard Ellis wrote: Hi Ruslan, here's the two sets of results. FWIW, from your response to ruslan, it _does_ look like your hand-added group1 index was messing up the query planner. It's on GroupId, while we already had an index on GroupId, MemberId. Thanks Richard Ruslan Zakirov wrote: Ok, I have an idea how to fix that problem Here is new file for testing that will give me more info to find the best way to fixing this. We're really close. You can run it using: mysql -t -u root -ppassword rt3 ../search_possible_owners.mysql.sql test.res As a first step to fix it you can create the following index on Groups table: CREATE INDEX RUZ_Groups1 ON Groups(Domain, Type, id); Please, run commands from the attachment twice before indexing and after. Thank you for the feedback. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Richard Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ruslan, Really appreciate the help on this. I'd love to find out why we are seeing such odd results: 298 ticket owners when their are only 88 active users 1.5 million rows of data when we only have 9983 ticks as of this morning. Really odd Thanks Richard [snip] ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | main | range | PRIMARY,Users3 | PRIMARY | 4 | NULL | 1317 | Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | Principals_1 | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3.main.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | CachedGroupMembers_2 | ref| DisGrouMem,GrouMem,group1,member1 | member1 | 5 | rt3.Principals_1.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4 | range | ACL1 | ACL1| 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index; Distinct | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | eq_ref | PRIMARY,Groups1,Groups2 | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3.CachedGroupMembers_2.GroupId |1 | Using where; Distinct| ++-+--++---+-+-+--+--+--+ +---+---+ | PrincipalType | COUNT(id) | +---+---+ | Group | 298 | +---+---+ ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4 | range | ACL1 | ACL1 | 54 | NULL | 296 | Using where; Using index | ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ ++ | COUNT(Groups_3.id) | ++ | 0 | ++ ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+--+---+-+-+-+-+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4| range | ACL1| ACL1| 54 | NULL| 296 | Using where; Using index | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | ref |
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
Jesse, I know that they both have index on CachedGroupMembers table that starts from 'MemberId' column. And it does mess up optimizer and doesn't matter if it's one column or multiple like in (MemberId, GroupId, Disabled) index (Jeff created such thing). We really need such index in the core on CGM table, otherwise people have problems with searches by watchers (like in Requestor is XXX search or More about XXX box). It's very sad that mysql can not deal with that. Fix I've implemented in 3.6.6 helps people on setups with few ACL records and few queues, but not in these two cases. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 7:28 PM, Jesse Vincent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 04:22:46PM +, Richard Ellis wrote: Hi Ruslan, here's the two sets of results. FWIW, from your response to ruslan, it _does_ look like your hand-added group1 index was messing up the query planner. It's on GroupId, while we already had an index on GroupId, MemberId. -- Best regards, Ruslan. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 07:42:30PM +0300, Ruslan Zakirov wrote: Jesse, I know that they both have index on CachedGroupMembers table that starts from 'MemberId' column. And it does mess up optimizer and doesn't matter if it's one column or multiple like in (MemberId, GroupId, Disabled) index (Jeff created such thing). We really need such index in the core on CGM table, otherwise people have problems with searches by watchers (like in Requestor is XXX search or More about XXX box). It's very sad that mysql can not deal with that. Fix I've implemented in 3.6.6 helps people on setups with few ACL records and few queues, but not in these two cases. Got it. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
Hey, Rechard, the latest results suggest me that we've saddled this beast :) at least that what explain says and I hope it's correct. You can check that query again and it should be fast. Wanna try? You can use SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE ... to make sure it's reproducible and is not cache hit. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Richard Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ruslan, here's the two sets of results. Thanks Richard -- Best regards, Ruslan. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] SOT: high performance web cache for RT
On Mar 19, 2008, at 12:30 PM, Joe Casadonte wrote: Following up on a thread from a couple of weeks ago. I'm curious as to how something like Varnish can help with what is, essentially, dynamically-generated content? It won't, unless you have a public view that gives the same view to every anonymous user. And then it will only reduce load for those people. It will also help for serving up the static content (image, style sheets), provided you've configured apache to serve those up outside of the mason code. However there is so little of this it hardly seems worth it, possibly unless you're serving up the static content using the same mod_perl processes as the main app uses. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
Jeff, always Cc the list. Version of your mysql server? As far as I can see you suffer from mysql bug, output from your server is equal in both cases what is really wrong and mysql must use new index in those test queries I sent to the list. There are several options: 1) Delete any indexes on CachedGroupMembers table which starts from MemberId column, but that will slowdown other queries and may be terribly, depends on proprotions of your DB. 2) Upgrade to mysql 5.0.45 or greater and create index I suggested in this thread earlier. 3) I have another idea how we can improve that in the code, but that needs more investigation with a lot of users' feedback and a lot of mine and users' time. As long as MySQL 4.x has ended its life time and 5.0.x is stable version then I think it's fair enough to recommend recent versions instead of continuose refactoring of the code to make all those broken mysqls happy. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Jeff Voskamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ruslan Zakirov wrote: Ok, I have an idea how to fix that problem Here is new file for testing that will give me more info to find the best way to fixing this. We're really close. You can run it using: mysql -t -u root -ppassword rt3 ../search_possible_owners.mysql.sql test.res As a first step to fix it you can create the following index on Groups table: CREATE INDEX RUZ_Groups1 ON Groups(Domain, Type, id); Please, run commands from the attachment twice before indexing and after. Thank you for the feedback. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Richard Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ruslan, Really appreciate the help on this. I'd love to find out why we are seeing such odd results: 298 ticket owners when their are only 88 active users 1.5 million rows of data when we only have 9983 ticks as of this morning. Really odd Thanks Richard Since we were also having problems here's our output. spw.out is before. spw.out2 is after. Jeff Voskamp University of Waterloo ++-+--++--+--+-+---+--+--+ | id | select_type | table| type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+--++--+--+-+---+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | main | range | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | NULL | 4138 | Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | Groups_3 | ref| PRIMARY,groups_key,Groups1,Groups2,Groups9,Groups2a,Groups1a | Groups1a | 67 | const | 630 | Using where; Using index; Distinct | | 1 | SIMPLE | Principals_1 | eq_ref | PRIMARY,Principals4 | PRIMARY | 4 | rt3_inst.main.id |1 | Using where; Distinct| | 1 | SIMPLE | CachedGroupMembers_2 | ref| DisGrouMem,MyCGM1 | MyCGM1 | 10 | rt3_inst.main.id,rt3_inst.Groups_3.id |1 | Using where; Using index; Distinct | | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4| range | ACL1 | ACL1 | 54 | NULL | 371 | Using where; Using index; Distinct | ++-+--++--+--+-+---+--+--+ +---+---+ | PrincipalType | COUNT(id) | +---+---+ | Cc| 1 | | Group | 372 | +---+---+ ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra| ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ | 1 | SIMPLE | ACL_4 | range | ACL1 | ACL1 | 54 | NULL | 371 | Using where; Using index | ++-+---+---+---+--+-+--+--+--+ ++
Re: [rt-users] SOT: high performance web cache for RT
how something like Varnish can help with what is, essentially, dynamically-generated content? It will also help for serving up the static content (image, style sheets), provided you've configured apache to serve those up outside of the mason code. However there is so little of this it hardly seems worth it, possibly unless you're serving up the static content using the same mod_perl processes as the main app uses. Though these days, RT goes to lengths to compress the CSS and mark everything for agressive browser caching. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
Hi Ruslan, You are a genius. Response time for the Query Builder is now back to 4 seconds which is good enough for me :0. Thanks to all your team for all the efforts to work out what was wrong. Thanks Richard Ruslan Zakirov wrote: Hey, Rechard, the latest results suggest me that we've saddled this beast :) at least that what explain says and I hope it's correct. You can check that query again and it should be fast. Wanna try? You can use SELECT SQL_NO_CACHE ... to make sure it's reproducible and is not cache hit. On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Richard Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ruslan, here's the two sets of results. Thanks Richard ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.4 poor query performance
Ruslan Zakirov wrote: Jeff, always Cc the list. Version of your mysql server? As far as I can see you suffer from mysql bug, output from your server is equal in both cases what is really wrong and mysql must use new index in those test queries I sent to the list. There are several options: 1) Delete any indexes on CachedGroupMembers table which starts from MemberId column, but that will slowdown other queries and may be terribly, depends on proprotions of your DB. 2) Upgrade to mysql 5.0.45 or greater and create index I suggested in this thread earlier. 3) I have another idea how we can improve that in the code, but that needs more investigation with a lot of users' feedback and a lot of mine and users' time. As long as MySQL 4.x has ended its life time and 5.0.x is stable version then I think it's fair enough to recommend recent versions instead of continuose refactoring of the code to make all those broken mysqls happy. I'll try to remember to reply all from here on in. We're on Mysql-5.0.22 as packaged by RedHat for Enterprise Linux 5.1. Dropping indexes for now. Can re-instate later. Then I can also drop my coding hacks. Will look into getting a shiny new MySQL. jeff Voskamp ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] RT 3.6.5 LDAP authentication and Active Directory
Hi, I'm trying to get our rt install to authenticate with Active Directory. I've got the configuration from these two links into our RT_SiteConfig.pm: http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/LDAP http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/LdapSiteConfigSettingsForActiveDirectory At this point, I'm just trying to get authentication to work, I'm not trying to add create users or anything like that. I've stripped the configuration down to a minimum and I'm still getting: [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [debug]: Trying LDAP authentication (/usr/local/rt/local/lib/RT/User_Local.pm:155) [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [debug]: RT::User::IsPassword auth method IsLDAPPassword FAILED (/usr/local/rt/local/lib/RT/User_Local.pm:293) [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [info]: RT::User::IsInternalPassword AUTH FAILED: FOO (/usr/local/rt/local/lib/RT/User_Local.pm:257) [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [debug]: RT::User::IsPassword auth method IsInternalPassword FAILED (/usr/local/rt/local/lib/RT/User_Local.pm:293) [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [error]: FAILED LOGIN for FOO from 172.16.9.188 (/usr/local/rt/share/html/autohandler:251) I've increased the logging level to debug but it isn't pointing me any closer to a resolution. Is there any increased logging that I can enable to attempt to find the actual problem? I can still login to rt using the internal authentication method just not LDAP. I've got the utility called Active Directory Explorer from sysinternals.com - there are three attributes named badPwdCount, badPasswordTime and logonCount stored in Active Directory. None of those three have changed in all of my testing. I did make a slight change to $LdapUser and started getting an additional error in the log that led me to believe that I had at least that parameter and LdapPass correct (again, I'm using my userid to view AD). Thanks in advance, Kevin ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.5 LDAP authentication and Active Directory
I think I got it to work, changed LdapFilter to * rather than just commenting the line out. I knew we didn't have posixAccount in that attribute but didn't know I would actually need it enabled. sorry for the wasted bandwidth, Kevin At 02:19 PM 3/19/2008, Kevin Sheen wrote: Hi, I'm trying to get our rt install to authenticate with Active Directory. I've got the configuration from these two links into our RT_SiteConfig.pm: http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/LDAP http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/LdapSiteConfigSettingsForActiveDirectory At this point, I'm just trying to get authentication to work, I'm not trying to add create users or anything like that. I've stripped the configuration down to a minimum and I'm still getting: [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [debug]: Trying LDAP authentication (/usr/local/rt/local/lib/RT/User_Local.pm:155) [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [debug]: RT::User::IsPassword auth method IsLDAPPassword FAILED (/usr/local/rt/local/lib/RT/User_Local.pm:293) [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [info]: RT::User::IsInternalPassword AUTH FAILED: FOO (/usr/local/rt/local/lib/RT/User_Local.pm:257) [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [debug]: RT::User::IsPassword auth method IsInternalPassword FAILED (/usr/local/rt/local/lib/RT/User_Local.pm:293) [Wed Mar 19 17:57:02 2008] [error]: FAILED LOGIN for FOO from 172.16.9.188 (/usr/local/rt/share/html/autohandler:251) I've increased the logging level to debug but it isn't pointing me any closer to a resolution. Is there any increased logging that I can enable to attempt to find the actual problem? I can still login to rt using the internal authentication method just not LDAP. I've got the utility called Active Directory Explorer from sysinternals.com - there are three attributes named badPwdCount, badPasswordTime and logonCount stored in Active Directory. None of those three have changed in all of my testing. I did make a slight change to $LdapUser and started getting an additional error in the log that led me to believe that I had at least that parameter and LdapPass correct (again, I'm using my userid to view AD). Thanks in advance, Kevin ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Mysql problems with our RT system
Did anyone ever figure this out? I am having the same problem. At
first I had the regular password style:
DBI connect('dbname=rt3;host=localhost','rt',...) failed: Client does
not support authentication protocol requested by server; consider
upgrading MySQL client at
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/DBIx/SearchBuilder/Handle.pm line 106
[Wed Mar 19 14:06:33 2008] [error] [client 10.20.1.102] Connect Failed
Client does not support authentication protocol requested by server;
consider upgrading MySQL client\n at /opt/rt3/lib/RT.pm line 220\n
Changing the password to use the old_password function gave me:
[Wed Mar 19 14:07:37 2008] [notice] child pid 6190 exit signal
Segmentation fault (11)
Thanks in advance,
Peter Musolino
D.B. Zwirn (UK) Ltd.
52 Conduit Street
London, W1S 2YZ
Phone: +44 (0) 20 7220 2322
Mobile: +44 (0) 79 0953 0687
peter.musolino at dbzco dot com
I enabled the old password support in my.cnf and then re-started both
apache
and mysql. When I try to hit the site in the web browser I get a
blank
page, absolutely nothing with no errors.
In the httpd/error_log I get:
[Wed May 23 11:08:23 2007] [notice] child pid 28611 exit signal
Segmentation
fault (11)
In the httpd/access_log I get:
ip-address - - [23/May/2007:09:45:17 -0500] Get /rt3 HTTP/1.1
500 662
There is nothing in the rt.log.
CR
On 5/23/07, Scott Courtney scott at 4th.com
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
wrote:
On Wednesday 23 May 2007 10:58, Carlos Randolph wrote:
I've gone into MySQL and did the whole OLD_PASSWORD thing for the
RT_USER
account but we still get the same thing. I'm checked to make sure
the
the
Perl modules are all up to date and they are. I'm not sure what
else I
should look at so any help would be appreciated.
Did you enable old password support in your my.cnf (or equivalent)
config
file? I believe you can't do it on an account-by-account basis unless
it's
also enabled at the global level in the server config.
Kind regards,
Scott
--
--
Peter Musolino
D.B. Zwirn (UK) Ltd.
52 Conduit Street
London, W1S 2YZ
Phone: +44 (0) 20 7220 2322
Mobile: +44 (0) 79 0953 0687
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This e-mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It may
contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby noti
fied that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail and
any attachment(s) is strictly prohibited. D.B. Zwirn Co., L.P. reserves the
right to archive
and monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying
to this e-mail and
delete the message and any attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] SOT: high performance web cache for RT
Joe Casadonte wrote: On 3/6/2008 7:37 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: Sven Sternberger wrote: I found a very interesting software project, which boost my RT test instance. http://varnish.projects.linpro.no/ due to the nature of cache systems it is not working with https traffic, but nevertheless It could be helpful for a lot of environments. And I will try a combined solution with pound and varnish, may this will work. We use exactly this with RT. Following up on a thread from a couple of weeks ago. I'm curious as to how something like Varnish can help with what is, essentially, dynamically-generated content? As other people have said, inverse caches like varnish don't do much for the dynamic content. What they make a lot more efficient is serving up the constant stuff -- CSS, images etc. which frequently take up a much larger percentage of the HTTP requests involved in serving the site than you might expect. One consideration that no-one has highlighted yet is that this enables you to use memory more efficiently in a loaded server. An apache process with mod_perl can get pretty chunky, and (for the typical unix-type mpm_prefork scenario) there can be dozens of such processes. Use of the inverse cache means that the easy work of serving constant data is picked off early by the much smaller varnish process and that ultimately you need fewer of those big apaches cluttering up the process table, and that those apaches are dedicated to doing the important heavy-weight processing. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew Seaman The Bunker, Ash Radar Station PGP: 0x60AE908C on serversMarshborough Rd Tel: +44 1304 814890 Sandwich Fax: +44 1304 814899 Kent, CT13 0PL, UK signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
