Sending every request in apache to the mod_jk module.

[Krause Karin]

Hi all,
I read about that issues several times in this mailing list, but got no
clear answer to this.
I use  Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_jk/1.2.4 and Tomcat 4.1.27

I got the following debug messages in the mod_jk log file:
[Fri Sep 03 10:14:32 2004 AM]  [jk_uri_worker_map.c (460)]: Into
jk_uri_worker_map_t::map_uri_to_worker
[Fri Sep 03 10:14:32 2004 AM]  [jk_uri_worker_map.c (477)]: Attempting to
map URI '/'
[Fri Sep 03 10:14:32 2004 AM]  [jk_uri_worker_map.c (599)]:
jk_uri_worker_map_t::map_uri_to_worker, done without a match
[Fri Sep 03 10:14:32 2004 AM]  [jk_uri_worker_map.c (460)]: Into
jk_uri_worker_map_t::map_uri_to_worker
[Fri Sep 03 10:14:32 2004 AM]  [jk_uri_worker_map.c (477)]: Attempting to
map URI '/index.html'
[Fri Sep 03 10:14:32 2004 AM]  [jk_uri_worker_map.c (599)]:
jk_uri_worker_map_t::map_uri_to_worker, done without a match

It seems that for every request sent to Apache, the mod_jk module is asked
if it could handle that request.
Is this the "usual" behaviour? Couldn't this have performance issues? Could
it be, that this is a configuration error?
Does anybody know, how Apache handles a request in combination with mod_jk?

Any help is appreciated.

Regards
Karin

Here is an extract from my configuration (httpd.conf):

##
## httpd.conf -- Apache HTTP server configuration file
##

...
LoadModule jk_module   libexec/mod_jk.so
AddModule mod_jk.c
###
# mod_jk 
###
JkWorkersFile   /usr/local/apache/conf/worker.properties
JkLogFile   /var/apache/logs/mod_jk.log
JkLogLevel  debug 
JkLogStampFormat"[%a %b %d %H:%M:%S %Y %p] "
JkMount /tomcat_sample/* tomcat_sample

# ServletExec Admin 

SetHandler servlet-exec




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RemoteAddrValve and mod_jk

[Krause Karin]

> Hi everybody,
> I have a question regarding the use of the RemoteAddrValve.
I have the following scenario:
Apache Web Server on a separate host, Tomcat 4.1.27 on another host.
I use mod_jk 1.2.5 to connect from Apache to Tomcat.
I wish to make sure that only requests from a specific Apache Server can connect to 
Tomcat.
I thought that the RemoteAddrValve can be used to check, from which machine the request
comes to Tomcat. It works fine if I use http (without Apache/mod_jk). If I use it 
together with Apache/mod_jk,
the remoteAddr received by the RemoteAddrValve is always "localhost". 
So my question is, how can I assure that the mod_jk request comes from my specific 
Apache host and not from
another Apache. Is there another way to do it (eventually in the configuration of the 
CoyoteConnector)
Thanks for any help.
Regards 
> Karin
> 
> 
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

mod_jk 1.2.6

[Krause Karin]

Hello,
does anybody know from where I can get mod_jk in version 1.2.6? I found only
binaries and sources for version 1.2.5.
Or does anybody know which CVS tag I must use to check out this version?
Thanks for your help in advance.

Regards Karin


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

FW: HELP: Want to custom the TOMCAT NOT-FOUND page.

[Krause Karin]

Hi maybe this can help 
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.1-doc/config/host.html

You write your own errorReportValveClass to customize Error Pages.


-Original Message-
From: Krause Karin 
Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2004 11:26
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: HELP: Want to custom the TOMCAT NOT-FOUND page.


Hi,
you can specify custom error pages in the web.xml
file
see the servlet spec

here is an example:


404
/errorpages/404.html


Karin


-Original Message-
From: Rai Ou [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2004 10:24
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: HELP: Want to custom the TOMCAT NOT-FOUND page.


Tomcat will give the HTTP 404, 500 (and so on...) Error pages when 
accessed by a wrong URL. 

I want to custom that pages but, it seems that they are hard-coding
in tomcat, any good ideas for doing it ?

Thanks. 
Rai.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: connectionTimeout

[Krause Karin]

Hi,
I think, I finally found out what the problem is.

As Bill already said each child process in Apache (Apache 1.3) tries to
generate a connection to Tomcat. If there are more child processes on Apache site
that try to connect than maximal possible Threads in Tomcat (defined by means
of the property maxProcessor) everythings hangs (no more requests will reach
Tomcat). 

So I think I must set the maxProcessors on the Tomcat side equal or a little bit 
higher 
than the property maxClients on the Apache side. 

What do you think?

Regards Karin

-Original Message-
From: Krause Karin 
Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Januar 2004 09:19
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: connectionTimeout


I agree with you that closing the socket on each request isn't 
a good idea. 

But I have the feeling that only if the socket is closed the thread
is freed and Tomcat can accept new input on this thread.

Yesterday I did some more tests and I'd like to explain you one in more detail:
I use
Apache (Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) mod_jk/1.2.4) -> Tomcat 4.1.27
I work with the default sample servlets (the Helloworld Servlet)

The configuration of my CoyoteConnector looks like this:


I did only sequential requests. So I did my first and get the answer back, the second 
and again I get
the answer back. So than I did the third request and I had to wait quite a while (and 
as I recognized
in my mod_jk logging output I had to wait 2 minutes (like I set my timeout)).
SEE:

[Wed Jan 21 16:32:50 2004]  [jk_ajp_common.c (966)]: ajp_send_request 2: request body 
to send 0 - request body to resend 0
--> Here the Request is sent to Tomcat
[Wed Jan 21 16:34:21 2004]  [jk_ajp_common.c (804)]: received from ajp13 #60
--> Here I got the answer back (takes 2 minutes)

In the Tomcat log I saw the following output:

20040122:085055.660 LFFM01 NO_PROJ common.ChannelSocket DEBUG T-59219Accepted 
socket Socket[addr=/194.40.39.77,port=16058,localport=9000] 
20040122:085122.547 LFFM01 NO_PROJ JK   INFO  T-12985263 
org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket: connection timeout reached 

-> The request is only processed further when the connection 
timeout is received ...

20040122:085122.550 LFFM01 NO_PROJ JK   DEBUG T-12985263 
org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket: receive()  
20040122:085122.551 LFFM01 NO_PROJ JK   DEBUG T-12985263 
org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket: read() [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8192 0 4 = 4 


When I set the connection timeout to 2000 I never will get something back.
(I tried it also with a connection timeout with -1 and also I got nothing back.)
As you would certainly agree I did not generate heavy load (even if I worked with a 
maximal thread number of three,
I did only sequential requests).

So what do you think?

Cheers Karin




-Original Message-
From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Januar 2004 04:28
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: connectionTimeout


connectionTimeout="-1" (or channelSocket.soTimeout=-1 in jk2.properties)
disables it.

The reason that the socket isn't closed on each request is to avoid the cost
of setting up and tearing down sockets.  By leaving it open, the Apache
child can just send the next request that gets handed to it down the same
open socket.  It's the same reasoning as the HTTP/1.1 keep-alive, except
that since the Apache <--> Tomcat socket has nothing to do with the browser
<--> Apache socket, there isn't a reason to close it.

"Krause Karin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> thanx for your answer (again )
>
> As far as I know I cannot disable the connectionTimeout.
> The connectionTimeout I mean here is a property of the CoyoteConnector
> (and if not set the default value is 60 sec). What I do not understand is,
> why the socket is not free again after the response is sent back to the
client.
> Tomcat can only accept new requests if the socket is removed (and it is
removed
> when the connectionTimeout is reached).
>
> Cheers Karin
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2004 10:34
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: connectionTimeout
>
>
>
> "Krause Karin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Hi everybody,
> > > I have a question regarding the configuration/behaviour of the
> org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteConnector (Tomcat 4.1.27).
> > I use Tomcat together with Apache (over mod_jk).
> > When I set the connectionTimeout to a very high value (for example 5
> hours) and the maxProcessors to a very
> > low value (for example 3) I can see the following behaviour. I can only
> make 2 requests,
> > than tomcat complains

RE: connectionTimeout

[Krause Karin]

I agree with you that closing the socket on each request isn't 
a good idea. 

But I have the feeling that only if the socket is closed the thread
is freed and Tomcat can accept new input on this thread.

Yesterday I did some more tests and I'd like to explain you one in more detail:
I use
Apache (Apache/1.3.26 (Unix) mod_jk/1.2.4) -> Tomcat 4.1.27
I work with the default sample servlets (the Helloworld Servlet)

The configuration of my CoyoteConnector looks like this:


I did only sequential requests. So I did my first and get the answer back, the second 
and again I get
the answer back. So than I did the third request and I had to wait quite a while (and 
as I recognized
in my mod_jk logging output I had to wait 2 minutes (like I set my timeout)).
SEE:

[Wed Jan 21 16:32:50 2004]  [jk_ajp_common.c (966)]: ajp_send_request 2: request body 
to send 0 - request body to resend 0
--> Here the Request is sent to Tomcat
[Wed Jan 21 16:34:21 2004]  [jk_ajp_common.c (804)]: received from ajp13 #60
--> Here I got the answer back (takes 2 minutes)

In the Tomcat log I saw the following output:

20040122:085055.660 LFFM01 NO_PROJ common.ChannelSocket DEBUG T-59219Accepted 
socket Socket[addr=/194.40.39.77,port=16058,localport=9000] 
20040122:085122.547 LFFM01 NO_PROJ JK   INFO  T-12985263 
org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket: connection timeout reached 

-> The request is only processed further when the connection 
timeout is received ...

20040122:085122.550 LFFM01 NO_PROJ JK   DEBUG T-12985263 
org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket: receive()  
20040122:085122.551 LFFM01 NO_PROJ JK   DEBUG T-12985263 
org.apache.jk.common.ChannelSocket: read() [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8192 0 4 = 4 


When I set the connection timeout to 2000 I never will get something back.
(I tried it also with a connection timeout with -1 and also I got nothing back.)
As you would certainly agree I did not generate heavy load (even if I worked with a 
maximal thread number of three,
I did only sequential requests).

So what do you think?

Cheers Karin




-Original Message-
From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Januar 2004 04:28
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: connectionTimeout


connectionTimeout="-1" (or channelSocket.soTimeout=-1 in jk2.properties)
disables it.

The reason that the socket isn't closed on each request is to avoid the cost
of setting up and tearing down sockets.  By leaving it open, the Apache
child can just send the next request that gets handed to it down the same
open socket.  It's the same reasoning as the HTTP/1.1 keep-alive, except
that since the Apache <--> Tomcat socket has nothing to do with the browser
<--> Apache socket, there isn't a reason to close it.

"Krause Karin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> thanx for your answer (again )
>
> As far as I know I cannot disable the connectionTimeout.
> The connectionTimeout I mean here is a property of the CoyoteConnector
> (and if not set the default value is 60 sec). What I do not understand is,
> why the socket is not free again after the response is sent back to the
client.
> Tomcat can only accept new requests if the socket is removed (and it is
removed
> when the connectionTimeout is reached).
>
> Cheers Karin
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2004 10:34
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: connectionTimeout
>
>
>
> "Krause Karin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Hi everybody,
> > > I have a question regarding the configuration/behaviour of the
> org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteConnector (Tomcat 4.1.27).
> > I use Tomcat together with Apache (over mod_jk).
> > When I set the connectionTimeout to a very high value (for example 5
> hours) and the maxProcessors to a very
> > low value (for example 3) I can see the following behaviour. I can only
> make 2 requests,
> > than tomcat complains
> > org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool: All threads are busy,
waiting.
> Please increase maxThreads or check the servlet status3 3
>
> Yup.  In the normal state, the 'maxProcessors' should be at least as big
as
> the number of Apache children.  Also, 'connectionTimeout' should usually
be
> disabled (although on a few Linux systems, I've had problems doing this).
> There is a one-to-one mapping from Apache children to Tomcat socket
> connections.  If Apache launches one more child than Tomact can handle,
you
> will see the results as below.
>
> > No more requests can be performed until a restart.
> > Does this mean a c

RE: HELP: Want to custom the TOMCAT NOT-FOUND page.

[Krause Karin]

Hi,
you can specify custom error pages in the web.xml
file
see the servlet spec

here is an example:


404
/errorpages/404.html


Karin


-Original Message-
From: Rai Ou [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2004 10:24
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: HELP: Want to custom the TOMCAT NOT-FOUND page.


Tomcat will give the HTTP 404, 500 (and so on...) Error pages when 
accessed by a wrong URL. 

I want to custom that pages but, it seems that they are hard-coding
in tomcat, any good ideas for doing it ?

Thanks. 
Rai.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: connectionTimeout

[Krause Karin]

thanx for your answer (again )

As far as I know I cannot disable the connectionTimeout.
The connectionTimeout I mean here is a property of the CoyoteConnector
(and if not set the default value is 60 sec). What I do not understand is,
why the socket is not free again after the response is sent back to the client.
Tomcat can only accept new requests if the socket is removed (and it is removed
when the connectionTimeout is reached).

Cheers Karin

-Original Message-
From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2004 10:34
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: connectionTimeout



"Krause Karin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Hi everybody,
> > I have a question regarding the configuration/behaviour of the
org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteConnector (Tomcat 4.1.27).
> I use Tomcat together with Apache (over mod_jk).
> When I set the connectionTimeout to a very high value (for example 5
hours) and the maxProcessors to a very
> low value (for example 3) I can see the following behaviour. I can only
make 2 requests,
> than tomcat complains
> org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool: All threads are busy, waiting.
Please increase maxThreads or check the servlet status3 3

Yup.  In the normal state, the 'maxProcessors' should be at least as big as
the number of Apache children.  Also, 'connectionTimeout' should usually be
disabled (although on a few Linux systems, I've had problems doing this).
There is a one-to-one mapping from Apache children to Tomcat socket
connections.  If Apache launches one more child than Tomact can handle, you
will see the results as below.

> No more requests can be performed until a restart.
> Does this mean a connection (socket) is as long occupied as long the
connectionTimeout is set (even if the response was already sent back to the
browser)?
> I had expected that even if the set connectiontimeout is high, the socket
should be given free when the response is sent back to the client.
> I observed the Tomcat process by means of lsof and saw that the tomcat
process has opened 3 sockets to apache.
> When I set a connectionTimeout to a low value (for example 15 sec) the
error above (all threads are busy) does not appear any more.
> The lsof command shows that sockets are regulary removed and build again.
I debug the Tomcat code and saw that the socket is
> closed when the timeout occurs. I had expected another behaviour. I mean
that not every time a new socket is established from Tomcat
> to apache but sockets are reused.
>
> Thanx for any help
> Karin




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

connectionTimeout

[Krause Karin]

> Hi everybody,
> I have a question regarding the configuration/behaviour of the 
> org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteConnector (Tomcat 4.1.27).
I use Tomcat together with Apache (over mod_jk).
When I set the connectionTimeout to a very high value (for example 5 hours) and the 
maxProcessors to a very
low value (for example 3) I can see the following behaviour. I can only make 2 
requests,
than tomcat complains
org.apache.tomcat.util.threads.ThreadPool: All threads are busy, waiting. Please 
increase maxThreads or check the servlet status3 3
No more requests can be performed until a restart.
Does this mean a connection (socket) is as long occupied as long the connectionTimeout 
is set (even if the response was already sent back to the browser)?
I had expected that even if the set connectiontimeout is high, the socket should be 
given free when the response is sent back to the client.
I observed the Tomcat process by means of lsof and saw that the tomcat process has 
opened 3 sockets to apache.
When I set a connectionTimeout to a low value (for example 15 sec) the error above 
(all threads are busy) does not appear any more.
The lsof command shows that sockets are regulary removed and build again. I debug the 
Tomcat code and saw that the socket is 
closed when the timeout occurs. I had expected another behaviour. I mean that not 
every time a new socket is established from Tomcat
to apache but sockets are reused.

Thanx for any help
Karin



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: disableUploadTimeout

[Krause Karin]

Thanx for your answer.
Now it is more clear for me.
By the way, I have seen that the default value for the disableUploadTimeout is yet 
"false".
It is logged by the org.apache.jk.server.JkCoyoteHandler (in Debug level).
Regards Karin

-Original Message-
From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2004 09:36
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: disableUploadTimeout


Actually, I believe that there is a documentation error:  I believe that the
default value is 'true'.

With all other values at there default setting, disableUploadTimeout="true"
means that Tomcat will use a longer timeout value (default: 5Min, like
Apache/httpd) when reading the request message body than it does when
waiting for the next keep-alive request (default: 15Sec).  This can be
usefull if your webapp uploads large amounts of data, but probably won't
matter if you only POST small, simple forms.

"Krause Karin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi everybody,
I have a question regarding the org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteConnector
(Tomcat 4.1.27)
What does the property "disableUploadTimeout" really mean? I do not
understand the explanation:
"This flag allows the servlet container to use a different, longer
connection timeout while a servlet is being executed, which in the end
allows either the servlet a longer amount of time to complete its execution,
or a longer timeout during data upload. If not specified, this attribute is
set to "false".
Which connection timeout will be used if the property is set to true? Is it
recommended to set it to true?
Thanx for any help.
Karin





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

disableUploadTimeout

[Krause Karin]

Hi everybody,
I have a question regarding the org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteConnector (Tomcat 
4.1.27)
What does the property "disableUploadTimeout" really mean? I do not understand the 
explanation:
"This flag allows the servlet container to use a different, longer connection timeout 
while a servlet is being executed, which in the end allows either the servlet a longer 
amount of time to complete its execution, or a longer timeout during data upload. If 
not specified, this attribute is set to "false".
Which connection timeout will be used if the property is set to true? Is it 
recommended to set it to true?
Thanx for any help.
Karin




Viele Grüsse
Karin Krause

WIOI1
052 261 2947


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

FW: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org

[Krause Karin]

>  -Original Message-
> From:     Krause Karin  
> Sent: Montag, 15. Dezember 2003 15:36
> To:   'Tomcat Users List'
> Subject:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Urgent: referencing external jar files from a jar in WEB-INF/lib

[Krause Karin]

Hello,
I just posted a very similar question some time ago, but got no answer until now.
see http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-user&m=106337028016813&w=2
I use Tomcat 4.1.27.
My question was, if Tomcat ClassLoaders can evaluate  the CLASS-PATH attribute set in 
the manifest of a jar file, to reference external jar files.
In the meantime I saw that the common class loader (and also server and shared)
can interprete the CLASS-PATH variable of the Manifest file of a jar file.
Unfortunately it seems not to work if I put a jar file, that references an external 
jar file by means of the CLASS-PATH
variable in the Manifest, in the WEB-INF/lib of my WAR file.
Should this be possible, or not ? Are there any other methods (do I use the wrong 
one)? As I understood the servlet spec 2.3
chapter 9.7.1 it should be possible by means of the CLASS-PATH attribute:
Snippet from the servlet spec 2.3 chapter 9.7.1
"WebContainers should be able to recognize declared dependencies expressed
in the manifest entry of any of the library JARs under the WEB-INF/lib entry 
in a WAR"
So the question is very urgent to me. Please help me.
Cheers Karin



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

InstallTask using a Context configuration ".xml" file

[Krause Karin]

> Hello,
I have a question regarding Tomcat 4.1.27.
I would like to use the ant InstallTask to install a web application. I'd like
to install my web application by means of a Context configuration ".xml file" .


Thats the way my ant file looks:






  


As fas as I understood the documentation of the "Manager App", the path attribute is 
not used if a context.xml file is specified.
Instead the context path defined in the context.xml file ist used during
installation. 

The Ant InstallTask requires a path attribute. For me that makes no sense. It should 
either require the path attribute
or the config attribute. I think it is very confusing in case the path attribute 
differs from the context path defined in the 
context.xml file. 

Is this a bug?

Regards Karin

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Evaluation of the Manifest of a jar file

[Krause Karin]

Hello,
I read this article about the evaluation of the CLASSPATH attribute set in the 
manifest in a jar file.
This CLASSPATH attribute refers to other jar files.
see:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-user&m=105360018918350&w=2

I don't understand if the Tomcat class loaders (e.g. the common class loader) does 
this or not.
In my case it seems not to work (I use Tomcat 4.1.27, jdk 1.4.1). 
Any help appreciated.

Regards Karin


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: JSP Compilation - saving compiled JSPs to disk howto?

[Krause Karin]

Hello,
I use the following ant target to compile / and generate jsp definitions in
the web.xml file


  

 
 
 
 

 
 

 



 



This ant target generates java sources into a directory src. Afterwards those java 
classes are compiled
using the normal way all my project classes are compiled (I use Eclipse as IDE). Then 
I supply them inside
my WAR file. Also you will need the generated webXmlFragement (called web_jsp.xml). 
The compiled jsp's are
indeed just another servlets. Here is a snippet how the web_jsp.xml fragment may look 
for a jsp called footer.jsp

jsp.footer_jsp
jsp.footer_jsp


jsp.footer_jsp
/jsp/footer.jsp


In order to make my "normal" web.xml file more readable I just included the 
web_jsp.xml as so-called external
entity in my web.xml file. Here is an example for that.
http://java.sun.com/j2ee/dtds/web-app_2_3.dtd' [
 
]>
DemoAppl


demo
Simple Test Servlet to test the Jackpot Custom 
tags
servlet.JspSimpleServlet

simpleservlet.jsp.directory
/jsp




&web_jsp;



demo
*.do




So when accessing my jsp page "jsp/footer.jsp" than the servlet jsp.footer_jsp is 
invoked and no compilation
takes place.

Regards
Karin


-Original Message-
From: Duncan Frostick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Dienstag, 9. September 2003 12:29
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: JSP Compilation - saving compiled JSPs to disk howto?


(If this is received twice I apologise)

Hi all,

I'm hoping this is a simple question that only needs one config change, 
but I don't know. I need to configure tomcat so that when a JSP is 
compiled upon first request, the actual compiled file is saved to disk 
permanently and used by tomcat from the disk rather than stored and run 
only from memory. The reason this is needed is so that after a tomcat 
restart (which is needed quite regularly), all the JSPs don't need to be 
recompiled, which takes a long time on our large application. Of course, 
if the JSP source has changed, then it would need to recompile, but 
otherwise I'd like it to use a disk copy of the compiled JSP, saving the 
server recompiling upon a restart, thus saving our users a long time of 
waiting for the server to become responsive again.

Any help much appreciated,

Duncan Frostick


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Cannot shutdown Tomcat gracefully

[Krause Karin]

Hello,

I saw that bug in the bug database
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20663

I also receive this exception with Tomcat 4.1.27 and Solaris.
I'm just wondering why this bug has the Severity "Blocker".
Can someone tell me about the consequences of this bug?
Are there any severe consequences (I mean like the session
will not be serialized)

Thanks in advance
Regards Karin



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Authentication without authorisation

[Krause Karin]

Thanks!
I've tried this!
It runs!!!

-Original Message-
From: John Holman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mittwoch, 27. August 2003 13:40
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Authentication without authorisation


Krause

   
*


Will require authentication but not authorisation.

John.


Krause Karin wrote:

>Hi all,
>I've got a question regarding authentication. I wish to do
>authentication without authorisation. So this means everybody
>should be free to access my web-resource but I wish to know who it is.
>Therefore the accessing user must login.
>As probably everybody knows
>here I can configure that by means of a security-constraint/login-config in my 
>web.xml file.
>Here is a little example:
>
>   
>   Protect the Helloworld 
> example
>   
>   /servlet/HelloWorldExample
>   /servlet/SessionExample
>   POST
>   GET
>   
>
>
>   BASIC
>   public
>
>
>Please remark that no auth-constraint is defined, because anybody should
>have free access to this web-resource. So what I need is authentication without 
>authorisation. 
>The problem is that only if I define some auth-constraint in the security-constraint 
>the
>authenticate method of the Authenticator will be invoked. I think that the J2EE 
>Standard
>makes no restriction that authentication can only be used in combination with 
>authorisation.
>Am I wrong? Or is this a Tomcat bug?
>
>Cheers Karin
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>  
>


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Authentication without authorisation

[Krause Karin]

Hi all,
I've got a question regarding authentication. I wish to do
authentication without authorisation. So this means everybody
should be free to access my web-resource but I wish to know who it is.
Therefore the accessing user must login.
As probably everybody knows
here I can configure that by means of a security-constraint/login-config in my 
web.xml file.
Here is a little example:


Protect the Helloworld 
example

/servlet/HelloWorldExample
/servlet/SessionExample
POST
GET



BASIC
public


Please remark that no auth-constraint is defined, because anybody should
have free access to this web-resource. So what I need is authentication without 
authorisation. 
The problem is that only if I define some auth-constraint in the security-constraint 
the
authenticate method of the Authenticator will be invoked. I think that the J2EE 
Standard
makes no restriction that authentication can only be used in combination with 
authorisation.
Am I wrong? Or is this a Tomcat bug?

Cheers Karin

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

How to use

[Krause Karin]

Hello,
in my environment I have a servlet which act as an EJB Client.
The servlet uses BASIC authentication. But the call to the EJB should use another 
principal. As far as I understand the servlet spec,  can be used to do such 
things.
Here is a snippet from my web.xml file


EjbClientServlet
EjbClientServlet
examples.servlet.EjbClientServlet

tomcat

  

EjbClientServlet
/EjbClientServlet





WRCollection
/EjbClientServlet


admin




BASIC
Default


EjbCaller
Session
examples.ejb.session.ejbCaller.EjbCallerHome
examples.ejb.session.ejbCaller.EjbCaller

I don't understand how the mapping to the principal is made that is propagated to the 
EJB.
I assume I have to configure something in the configuration files of tomcat.
Unfortunately I could not find documentation about this. 
Any help is appreciated.
Cheers Karin


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: session expiry

[Krause Karin]

Hi Paul,
Session timeout can be configured in the deployment descriptor of your servlet 
(web.xml).
see servlet spec 2.3
"the session-timeout element defines the default session timeout
interval for all sessions created in this web application. The
specified timeout must be expressed in a whole number of minutes.
If the timeout is 0 or less, the container ensures the default
behaviour of sessions is never to time out."

Example

30

Regards Karin

-Original Message-
From: Paul Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Donnerstag, 10. Juli 2003 07:58
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: session expiry


Thank you for that. And where is the length of default session expiry
defined? How do I configure session life span for TC?

Thanks

Paul. 


> 
>  
> 
> public void close() {
> 
>  

session.inValidate();

> 
>   // kill my session here
> 
>  
> 
> } 
> 
> or failing that, how do I define a length of time for the session
life?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks
> 
>  
> 
> Paul.
> 
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Custom Realm: How to access the LoginConfig of the current context.

[Krause Karin]

Hi,

we are running Tomcat 4.1.24 and I try to implement a custom realm. 
Inside the realm I need access to the current context of my web app in order
to get some information from the LoginConfig object. Is there a possibility to
access this. I have seen that I can access the context in the authenticator, but
I don't see a possiblity to get it in a realm.

Any help is appreciated.

Regards
Karin




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

SIGTERM to stop TOMCAT

[Krause Karin]

Hi all,
I've got a question regarding stopping TOMCAT on solaris.
I use 
TOMCAT 4.0.3 Standalone (without any webserver)
Solaris 2.6
jdk1.3.1

Here my question:
Is it valid to stop TOMCAT by sending SIGTERM to
the process?

I'd like to do so, because I started TOMCAT
within a monitoring process. This is a little C-program, which starts
TOMCAT (by means of the catalina.sh script) and watch 
if the TOMCAT process is running. If the process
is not running the C-programm will autmatically restart it.
To terminate TOMCAT I
must kill the monitoring process, that send a SIGTERM
to its child process, the TOMCAT process. 

Thanx for your help in advance.

Regards
Karin




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: