RE: load balancing 2 tomcats on 1 machine question

[Allistair Crossley]

Hi Mladen,

Damn, no, I didn't :) Thanks very much indeed, seems to have done the trick :)

Cheers, Allistair.

> -Original Message-
> From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 18 August 2005 17:17
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: load balancing 2 tomcats on 1 machine question
> 
> 
> Allistair Crossley wrote:
> > Hi,
> >  
> > I thought I had this sussed but it seems I haven't :( 2 
> tomcats, 1 machine, JK to balance with stick sessions. The 
> following configuration works in that JK routes requests to 
> both the tomcats and so on. 
> >
> 
> Did you set the jvmRoute="tomcat1" inside server.xml  for the first and jvmRoute="tomcat2" for the second instance.
> 
> 
> >  
> > workers.tomcat_home="d:\jakarta-tomcat"
> > workers.java_home="c:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.5.0"
> > ps=\
> >
> 
> You don't need that
> 
> 
> >  
> > worker.inprocess.type=jni
> > 
> worker.inprocess.class_path=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)lib$(ps
> )tomcat.jar
> > worker.inprocess.cmd_line=start
> > 
> worker.inprocess.jvm_lib=$(workers.java_home)$(ps)jre$(ps)bin$
> (ps)classic$(ps)jvm.dll
> > 
> worker.inprocess.stdout=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)logs$(ps)in
> process.stdout
> > 
> worker.inprocess.stderr=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)logs$(ps)in
> process.stderr
> >
> 
> You don't need that too.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Mladen.
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 


 
---
QAS Ltd.
Registered in England: No 2582055
Registered in Australia: No 082 851 474
---



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

Re: load balancing 2 tomcats on 1 machine question

[Mladen Turk]

Allistair Crossley wrote:

Hi,
 
I thought I had this sussed but it seems I haven't :( 2 tomcats, 1 machine, JK to balance with stick sessions. The following configuration works in that JK routes requests to both the tomcats and so on. 



Did you set the jvmRoute="tomcat1" inside server.xml  
workers.tomcat_home="d:\jakarta-tomcat"

workers.java_home="c:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.5.0"
ps=\



You don't need that


 
worker.inprocess.type=jni

worker.inprocess.class_path=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)lib$(ps)tomcat.jar
worker.inprocess.cmd_line=start
worker.inprocess.jvm_lib=$(workers.java_home)$(ps)jre$(ps)bin$(ps)classic$(ps)jvm.dll
worker.inprocess.stdout=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)logs$(ps)inprocess.stdout
worker.inprocess.stderr=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)logs$(ps)inprocess.stderr



You don't need that too.


Regards,
Mladen.

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

RE: load balancing

[Serlet Jean-Claude]

Hello
I don't know if this solution is more effictive than the other one (load
balancing by using Apache server with different Tomcat instances)
But the two one don't realise a random access :
-cluster uses "rules"
-apache uses a "simple round-robin scheduling algorithm" ; so after a
disconnection  the new one is not certain to be affected to the same
Tomcat's instance

Jean-Claude
 

-Message d'origine-
De : Zohar Amir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : mercredi 11 mai 2005 09:14
À : Tomcat Users List
Objet : load balancing


Hi,
I have an application server that maintains session and I'd like to make it 
scalable. The clients and the application server are communicating using 
TCP.
When a client tries to connect, I'd like the load balancer to connect to a 
random AppServer node, and from that moment on - that node should handle the

session.
The client can disconnect and reconnect and the load balancer should connect

it with the node that handled the session before the disconnection.
Is it possible implementing these requirements using the model described in 
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.0-doc/cluster-howto.html? Is there

a better architecture that you can recommend which is more suitable to what 
I just described?
Thanks. 

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

Re: Load Balancing ..

[Peter Johnson]

Not exactly. Apache itself can't do load balancing. You could use a 
dedicated Tomcat instance to loadbalance to backend Tomcats in the same 
way as you described using Apache however either way you are still left 
with a single point of failure. Neither Tomcat nor Apache can 
loadbalance by themselves for various reasons including issues with IP 
address sharing a MAC address caching.

David Whitehurst wrote:
Am I correct that Tomcat is not setup to do load balancing without the 
use of an Apache fronting?  The mod_jk module is the best way to 
load-balance requests on multiple servers using the Tomcat container, 
either standalone or embedded in JBoss?

David L. Whitehurst
-
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: load-balancing

[Sng Wee Jim]

I am using jk 1.2.8

My workers.properties
===
ps=\

worker.list=loadbalancer

worker.tomcat1.type=ajp13
worker.tomcat1.host=localhost
worker.tomcat1.port=8009
worker.tomcat1.lbfactor=1
worker.tomcat1.socket_timeout=5
worker.tomcat1.recycle_timeout=10


worker.tomcat2.type=ajp13
worker.tomcat2.host=localhost
worker.tomcat2.port=8209
worker.tomcat2.lbfactor=1
worker.tomcat2.socket_timeout=5
worker.tomcat2.recycle_timeout=10


worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=tomcat1,tomcat2


- Jim




-Original Message-
From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 9:46 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: load-balancing

Sng Wee Jim wrote:
> I am using IIS 5.0 on Win2k Server edition. Will jk 1.2.9 solve the
issue for IIS too?
>

IIS and Apache on Windows are single child systems so the runtime data
was already shared among all clients.
I speak here about 1.2.8. Previous versions have lb code broken.

You'll have to give more details if jk 1.2.8 is what you are using,
at least the config params, etc...

Regards,
Mladen




The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely
for the addressee(s).
Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender of this email
immediately. You should not copy, use or disseminate the
information contained in the email.
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Capco.

http://www.capco.com/



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

Re: load-balancing

[Mladen Turk]

Sng Wee Jim wrote:
I am using IIS 5.0 on Win2k Server edition. Will jk 1.2.9 solve the issue for 
IIS too?
IIS and Apache on Windows are single child systems so the runtime data
was already shared among all clients.
I speak here about 1.2.8. Previous versions have lb code broken.
You'll have to give more details if jk 1.2.8 is what you are using,
at least the config params, etc...
Regards,
Mladen
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: load-balancing

[Sng Wee Jim]

I am using IIS 5.0 on Win2k Server edition. Will jk 1.2.9 solve the issue for 
IIS too?

- Jim



From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 3/9/2005 2:30 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: load-balancing



Sng Wee Jim wrote:
> I am load-balancing tomcat 5.0.28 using JK1.2/AJP1.3.
>
Cool ;)

>
>
> I noticed the loadbalancer virtual JK worker redirect requests to the tomcat 
> instances in a round-robin fashion, without taking into account which tomcat
> has a higher number of active sessions.

You must note what jk version and web server you are using.
If using 1.2.8 you will have up to 20% load-presumption error if
using Apache prefork or worker mpm, because the load balancing data
is maintained per child process.

The 1.2.9 (not released yet, but will be this week I hope) has that
resolved using shared memory.

Regards,
Mladen






The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely
for the addressee(s).
Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender of this email
immediately. You should not copy, use or disseminate the
information contained in the email.
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Capco.

http://www.capco.com/

Re: load-balancing

[Mladen Turk]

Sng Wee Jim wrote:
I am load-balancing tomcat 5.0.28 using JK1.2/AJP1.3.
Cool ;)

I noticed the loadbalancer virtual JK worker redirect requests to the tomcat 
instances in a round-robin fashion, without taking into account which tomcat
has a higher number of active sessions.
You must note what jk version and web server you are using.
If using 1.2.8 you will have up to 20% load-presumption error if
using Apache prefork or worker mpm, because the load balancing data
is maintained per child process.
The 1.2.9 (not released yet, but will be this week I hope) has that
resolved using shared memory.
Regards,
Mladen
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Load balancing SSL sessions

[James Richardson]

> > On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Kelly Vista wrote:
> >
> >> Hi -
> >>
> >> We are looking to deploy our app, running on Tomcat 5, soon and are
> >> exploring load balancing options.  We are looking at H/W and S/W
> >> solutions, and I was wondering if anyone had any past
> >> experience/advice they would like to share.
> >>
> >> Our deployment is as pretty run-of-the-mill as it gets: 2 machines,
> >> each running Tomcat.  We would like to avoid replicating state (since
> >> we have a lot of state in these apps, for reasons beyond  our current
> >> control).  Even in-memory session replication would not be option
> >> here, so we're punting on the Tomcat cluster solution.
> >

You could use Coherence*Web to cluster your session state, and a Foundry
switch to do the load balancing. It can do sticky load balancing, and if a
server fails then coherence will ensure that your other boxes still have
the session state. 

http://www.foundrynet.com/products/webswitches/serveriron/
http://www.tangosol.com/coherence-uses-a.jsp

Best Regards,

James


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

Re: Load balancing SSL sessions

[andrew]

Hi Kelly,
To do a software solution you could use the following method.
www.mysite.com   - Both servers can answer this request, (for example 
round robin dns)
or some form of  hsrp (im sure there is a patch for linux to do this)...
and based upon load and a simple script (perl, java, etc)
they then redirect the traffic server1.mysite.com, or server2.mysite.com

This way the session then stays on server1 or server2.
As I said though, you will need 2 certificates if you do not want the 
clients complaining about broken ssl certificates.

Anderw

Kelly Vista wrote:
Thanks Andrew.
In answer to your question, some of our app requires SSL -- exactly 
like an order-style app (but it's not a product ordering app).

So, a person's session might involve the following path:
1. non SSL req
2. non SSL req
3. SSL req
4. non SSL req
and we'd like that entire session to be persistent (i.e., sticky with 
one particular app server).  BTW, it is not an issue for us if that 
server fails during the session.  It will happen rarely and it's an 
acceptable failure for us (i.e., not mission critical data).

I should have mentioned that we expect 1000 req/hour with this app.  
However, our app is not necessarily quick (dependent on external 
resources) and does keep a lot of state.

I'm personally someone in favor of a H/W LB solution, but looking to 
be convinced that a valid S/W solution exists which is better (or just 
as good) as a H/W solution.  I know the S/W solution will be less 
reliable (not solid state), but I'm looking to hear from folks who 
have done SSL session affinity with a S/W only approach.


Andrew
On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Kelly Vista wrote:
Hi -
We are looking to deploy our app, running on Tomcat 5, soon and are 
exploring load balancing options.  We are looking at H/W and S/W 
solutions, and I was wondering if anyone had any past 
experience/advice they would like to share.




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

Re: Load balancing SSL sessions

[Kelly Vista]

BTW, I believe there is another issue with DNS round robin -- no support for 
sticky sessions.  There is no assurance that a series of requests (i.e., a 
session) for a particular client IP or client with a particular session ID 
will be routed to the same server.  Also, SSL sticky sessions are definitely 
not supported.

Again, pls correct me if I'm wrong.
From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" 
To: Tomcat Users List 
Subject: Re: Load balancing SSL sessions
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:01:10 -0600
you can also use DNS round robin,
www.mysite.com resolves to two or more IP addresses.
Filip
Andrew Miehs wrote:
We use F5 BigIPs, but they are probably overkill for your application - 
The cisco probably will be as well.

A 'Cheap' software solution might be to work with redirects, and 2 
separate IP addresses.
ie: ssl1.mysite.com and ssl2.mysite.com - You will need 2 ssl keys though 
for this to work.

Does all of your app require ssl? or just a certain part, ie: payment. Do 
you need the stickiness
for the whole app? or just for the ssl (seeing you are using tomcat, you 
will probably need it for the whole app)...

Andrew
On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Kelly Vista wrote:
Hi -
We are looking to deploy our app, running on Tomcat 5, soon and are 
exploring load balancing options.  We are looking at H/W and S/W 
solutions, and I was wondering if anyone had any past experience/advice 
they would like to share.

Our deployment is as pretty run-of-the-mill as it gets: 2 machines, each 
running Tomcat.  We would like to avoid replicating state (since we have 
a lot of state in these apps, for reasons beyond  our current control).  
Even in-memory session replication would not be option here, so we're 
punting on the Tomcat cluster solution.

-
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]
_
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

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

Re: Load balancing SSL sessions

[Kelly Vista]

I believe there is an issue with failover, however, with this route (thus, 
the second use case for load balancers - failover).  If an IP address in the 
DNS list goes down, it can take up to 48 hours before the DNS maps are 
updated to reflect the loss of one of the IPs.  In the meantime, clients may 
be getting directed to a server that is not available.

Someone pls correct me if I'm wrong about that.
From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" 
To: Tomcat Users List 
Subject: Re: Load balancing SSL sessions
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:01:10 -0600
you can also use DNS round robin,
www.mysite.com resolves to two or more IP addresses.
Filip
Andrew Miehs wrote:
We use F5 BigIPs, but they are probably overkill for your application - 
The cisco probably will be as well.

A 'Cheap' software solution might be to work with redirects, and 2 
separate IP addresses.
ie: ssl1.mysite.com and ssl2.mysite.com - You will need 2 ssl keys though 
for this to work.

Does all of your app require ssl? or just a certain part, ie: payment. Do 
you need the stickiness
for the whole app? or just for the ssl (seeing you are using tomcat, you 
will probably need it for the whole app)...

Andrew
On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Kelly Vista wrote:
Hi -
We are looking to deploy our app, running on Tomcat 5, soon and are 
exploring load balancing options.  We are looking at H/W and S/W 
solutions, and I was wondering if anyone had any past experience/advice 
they would like to share.

Our deployment is as pretty run-of-the-mill as it gets: 2 machines, each 
running Tomcat.  We would like to avoid replicating state (since we have 
a lot of state in these apps, for reasons beyond  our current control).  
Even in-memory session replication would not be option here, so we're 
punting on the Tomcat cluster solution.

-
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]
_
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

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

Re: Load balancing SSL sessions

[Kelly Vista]

Thanks Andrew.
In answer to your question, some of our app requires SSL -- exactly like an 
order-style app (but it's not a product ordering app).

So, a person's session might involve the following path:
1. non SSL req
2. non SSL req
3. SSL req
4. non SSL req
and we'd like that entire session to be persistent (i.e., sticky with one 
particular app server).  BTW, it is not an issue for us if that server fails 
during the session.  It will happen rarely and it's an acceptable failure 
for us (i.e., not mission critical data).

I should have mentioned that we expect 1000 req/hour with this app.  
However, our app is not necessarily quick (dependent on external resources) 
and does keep a lot of state.

I'm personally someone in favor of a H/W LB solution, but looking to be 
convinced that a valid S/W solution exists which is better (or just as good) 
as a H/W solution.  I know the S/W solution will be less reliable (not solid 
state), but I'm looking to hear from folks who have done SSL session 
affinity with a S/W only approach.

Thanks again,
From: Andrew Miehs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" 
To: "Tomcat Users List" 
Subject: Re: Load balancing SSL sessions
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 22:40:14 +0100
We use F5 BigIPs, but they are probably overkill for your application - The 
cisco probably will be as well.

A 'Cheap' software solution might be to work with redirects, and 2 separate 
IP addresses.
ie: ssl1.mysite.com and ssl2.mysite.com - You will need 2 ssl keys though 
for this to work.

Does all of your app require ssl? or just a certain part, ie: payment. Do 
you need the stickiness
for the whole app? or just for the ssl (seeing you are using tomcat, you 
will probably need it for the whole app)...

Andrew
On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Kelly Vista wrote:
Hi -
We are looking to deploy our app, running on Tomcat 5, soon and are 
exploring load balancing options.  We are looking at H/W and S/W 
solutions, and I was wondering if anyone had any past experience/advice 
they would like to share.

Our deployment is as pretty run-of-the-mill as it gets: 2 machines, each 
running Tomcat.  We would like to avoid replicating state (since we have a 
lot of state in these apps, for reasons beyond  our current control).  
Even in-memory session replication would not be option here, so we're 
punting on the Tomcat cluster solution.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

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

Re: Load balancing SSL sessions

[Andrew Miehs]

Problem with round robin dns is that you can not guarantee that the web 
browser/ client will not make a second request to the dns server during 
the session - although very very unlikely.

Andrew
On Feb 22, 2005, at 11:01 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
you can also use DNS round robin,
www.mysite.com resolves to two or more IP addresses.
Filip
Andrew Miehs wrote:
We use F5 BigIPs, but they are probably overkill for your application 
- The cisco probably will be as well.

A 'Cheap' software solution might be to work with redirects, and 2 
separate IP addresses.
ie: ssl1.mysite.com and ssl2.mysite.com - You will need 2 ssl keys 
though for this to work.

Does all of your app require ssl? or just a certain part, ie: 
payment. Do you need the stickiness
for the whole app? or just for the ssl (seeing you are using tomcat, 
you will probably need it for the whole app)...

Andrew
On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Kelly Vista wrote:
Hi -
We are looking to deploy our app, running on Tomcat 5, soon and are 
exploring load balancing options.  We are looking at H/W and S/W 
solutions, and I was wondering if anyone had any past 
experience/advice they would like to share.

Our deployment is as pretty run-of-the-mill as it gets: 2 machines, 
each running Tomcat.  We would like to avoid replicating state 
(since we have a lot of state in these apps, for reasons beyond  our 
current control).  Even in-memory session replication would not be 
option here, so we're punting on the Tomcat cluster solution.

-
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]

Re: Load balancing SSL sessions

[Filip Hanik - Dev Lists]

you can also use DNS round robin,
www.mysite.com resolves to two or more IP addresses.
Filip
Andrew Miehs wrote:
We use F5 BigIPs, but they are probably overkill for your application 
- The cisco probably will be as well.

A 'Cheap' software solution might be to work with redirects, and 2 
separate IP addresses.
ie: ssl1.mysite.com and ssl2.mysite.com - You will need 2 ssl keys 
though for this to work.

Does all of your app require ssl? or just a certain part, ie: payment. 
Do you need the stickiness
for the whole app? or just for the ssl (seeing you are using tomcat, 
you will probably need it for the whole app)...

Andrew
On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Kelly Vista wrote:
Hi -
We are looking to deploy our app, running on Tomcat 5, soon and are 
exploring load balancing options.  We are looking at H/W and S/W 
solutions, and I was wondering if anyone had any past 
experience/advice they would like to share.

Our deployment is as pretty run-of-the-mill as it gets: 2 machines, 
each running Tomcat.  We would like to avoid replicating state (since 
we have a lot of state in these apps, for reasons beyond  our current 
control).  Even in-memory session replication would not be option 
here, so we're punting on the Tomcat cluster solution.

-
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: Load balancing SSL sessions

[Andrew Miehs]

We use F5 BigIPs, but they are probably overkill for your application - 
The cisco probably will be as well.

A 'Cheap' software solution might be to work with redirects, and 2 
separate IP addresses.
ie: ssl1.mysite.com and ssl2.mysite.com - You will need 2 ssl keys 
though for this to work.

Does all of your app require ssl? or just a certain part, ie: payment. 
Do you need the stickiness
for the whole app? or just for the ssl (seeing you are using tomcat, 
you will probably need it for the whole app)...

Andrew
On Feb 22, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Kelly Vista wrote:
Hi -
We are looking to deploy our app, running on Tomcat 5, soon and are 
exploring load balancing options.  We are looking at H/W and S/W 
solutions, and I was wondering if anyone had any past 
experience/advice they would like to share.

Our deployment is as pretty run-of-the-mill as it gets: 2 machines, 
each running Tomcat.  We would like to avoid replicating state (since 
we have a lot of state in these apps, for reasons beyond  our current 
control).  Even in-memory session replication would not be option 
here, so we're punting on the Tomcat cluster solution.

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

RE: Load Balancing Configuration

[Alex]

when i was playing with sticky sessions (ultimately didn't get it working
-- which is why i went with the tomcat cluster and session replciation ..
which has it's benefits)

try putting StickySession=1 against the channel and/or the lb group.  does
this affect things?  i remember having it in for each channel and at the
time i thought it was right ... only the jk2 adapter didn't support it.



On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Fournier, Pete wrote:

> Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 11:58:28 -0400
> From: "Fournier, Pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Load Balancing Configuration
>
> Found the message. Unless I am reading it wrong that is for Clustering.
> I am looking at configuring Load Balancing with sticky sessions.
>
> I have managed to get the adaptor to route requests to each of the
> Tomcat instances since I originally posted yesterday, the only remaining
> problem is the session is not sticking. I can see it bouncing between
> the two of them.
>
> My current round-robin-non-session-sticking workers2.properties file is
> below.
>
> Thanks,



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

RE: Load Balancing Configuration

[Fournier, Pete]

Found the message. Unless I am reading it wrong that is for Clustering.
I am looking at configuring Load Balancing with sticky sessions. 

I have managed to get the adaptor to route requests to each of the
Tomcat instances since I originally posted yesterday, the only remaining
problem is the session is not sticking. I can see it bouncing between
the two of them. 

My current round-robin-non-session-sticking workers2.properties file is
below.

Thanks,

Peter Fournier

/ BEGIN workers2.properties
[logger]
info=Native logger
level=ERROR

[config:]
file=${serverRoot}/conf/workers2.properties
debug=1
debugEnv=1

[uriMap:]
info=Maps the requests.
debug=1

[shm]
info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status with
multiprocess servers
file=c:/Tomcat5/work/jk2.shm
debug=0

[workerEnv:]
info=Global server options
timing=0
debug=1

[lb:lb]
Info=default load balancer
debug=1

[channel.socket:pfournier:8019]
host=pfournier
port=8019
tomcatId=pfournierTomcat
group=PetesLB
lb_factor=100
route=pfournierTomcat

[ajp13:pfournier:8019]
channel=channel.socket:pfournier:8019

[channel.socket:kfansler1:8009]
host=kfansler1
port=8009
tomcatId=kfanslerTomcat
group=PetesLB
lb_factor=100
route=kfanslerTomcat

[ajp13:kfansler1:8009]
channel=channel.socket:kfansler1:8009

[lb:PetesLB]
worker=ajp13:pfournier:8019
worker=ajp13:kfansler1:8009
timeout=30
attempts=2
recovery=90
StickySession=1
noWorkersMsg=Server busy please try back later.
noWorkerCodeMsg=503

[uri:/admin]
info=Tomcat HTML based administration web application.
debug=0

[uri:/manager]
info=A scriptable management web application for the Tomcat Web Server.
debug=0

[uri:/*.jsp]
info=JSP Extension mapping.
debug=0

[uri:/ZipCode/ZipCodeLookup]
info=ZipCodeApplication
debug=0
group=lb:PetesLB

[status:]

[uri:/jkstatus/*]
group=status
/ END workers2.properties

-Original Message-
From: Alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 11:02 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Load Balancing Configuration



Hi Pete.  If you do a search on this list, i posted last week an email
with the configurations that work ... check it out.

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Fournier, Pete wrote:

> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 16:38:14 -0400
> From: "Fournier, Pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load Balancing Configuration


-
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: Load Balancing Configuration

[Alex]

Hi Pete.  If you do a search on this list, i posted last week an email
with the configurations that work ... check it out.

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Fournier, Pete wrote:

> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 16:38:14 -0400
> From: "Fournier, Pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load Balancing Configuration


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

Re: load balancing in workers2.properties

[nyhgan]

Hi,
 
I got this workers2.properties from wrox.com. It claims to support load balancing by 
using more than one tomcat jvms. 
 
In their setting, they have several startup scripts for each tomcat instance. Does it 
mean that I need to have a unique tomcat installation folder, and a unique server.xml 
for each instance? 
 
 
--- machine 1: startup.bat --
set CATALINA_BASE=c:\cluster\machine1
call startup

 
--- machine 2: startup.bat --
set CATALINA_BASE=c:\cluster\machine2
call startup

 
 
-- workers2.properties -
 
# settings for logger of type Apache2
[logger.apache2]
file="c:\cluster\apache\error.log"
level=INFO 
debug=1
# Provide the basic config needed
[config]
file=conf/workers2.properties
debug=0

[channel.socket:localhost:8009]
host=localhost
port=8009
tomcatId=machine1
group=balanced
lb_factor=1
# route=tc1
[ajp13:localhost:8009]
channel=channel.socket:machine1
[channel.socket:localhost:8109]
host=localhost
port=8109
tomcatId=machine2
group=balanced
lb_factor=1
# route=tc2
[ajp13:localhost:8109]
channel=channel.socket:machine2

[channel.socket:localhost:8209]
host=localhost
port=8209
tomcatId=machine3
group=balanced
lb_factor=1
# route=tc3
[ajp13:localhost:8209]
channel=channel.socket:machine3
[lb:balanced]
worker=ajp13:localhost:8009
worker=ajp13:localhost:8109
worker=ajp13:localhost:8209
timeout=90
attempts=3
recovery=30
StickySession=0
noWorkersMsg=Server Busy please retry later
noWorkerCodeMsg=503

# Shared Memory file settings
[shm]
file=c:\cluster\apache\jk2.shm
size=100
# Map the Tomcat jsp-examples webapp to the Web server uri space
[uri:/jsp-examples/*]
info=mapping the jsp-examples context of Tomcat
context=/jsp-examples
group=balanced
[status:]
# Status URI mapping
[uri:/jkstatus/*]
group=status

 
-
 
 
 
 
 
 


nyhgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  
Hi,
 
does anyone have a sample workers2.properties that can enable the load balancing 
between two tomat instances?
 
Thanks!
 
nyhgan
 


-
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!



-
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

RE: Load balancing question

[Kommuru, Bhaskar]

Hi Balaji,

Are you trying with or looking for any loadbalancing? If you are trying,
what you are trying with?
If you are looking for here is some link that should work greate for you.
But obviously, you find .. no good documentation. 
mod_jk2 documentation
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-3.3-doc/mod_jk-howto.html
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.1-doc/jk2/index.html
Many of us in the mailing list, got this worked and you can check in the
archive always if you have any problems.

Good luck
BK

-Original Message-
From: Balaji Varanasi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 11:25 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: Load balancing question


Hello All,
First of all, thanks Oliver and Mark for your assistance. I will follow
your suggestion and see if it works. 
 
I have a question about Load balancing and I am writing this after a lot
of frustration. I am trying to load balance Apache2 and 2 tomcat 4.1
servers. But I couldn't find any proper online resource that clearly
explains the process. All the resources I looked were either out dated
or didn't work properly. I will appreciate if somebody can give me
pointers on this topic. 
 
Thanks,
Balaji Varanasi

__

For information about the Standard Bank group visit our web site 

__

Disclaimer and confidentiality note 
Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relating to the official business of 
Standard Bank Group Limited  is proprietary to the group. 
It is confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. 
Standard Bank does not own and endorse any other content. Views and opinions are those 
of the sender unless clearly stated as being that of the group. 
The person addressed in the e-mail is the sole authorised recipient. Please notify the 
sender immediately if it has unintentionally reached you and do not read, 
disclose or use the content in any way.
Standard Bank can not assure that the integrity of this communication has been 
maintained nor that it is free of errors, virus, interception or interference.
___

RE: Load-balancing with MS IIS and tomcat 5

[Carl Olivier]

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 21 June 2004 08:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Load-balancing with MS IIS and tomcat 5


i have no idea what you are talking about i just want to get unsubscribed
out 
of this website

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

Re: Load-balancing with MS IIS and tomcat 5

[AHaider31]

i have no idea what you are talking about i just want to get unsubscribed out 
of this website

Re: Load-balancing with MS IIS and tomcat 5

[AHaider31]

i have no idea what you are talking about i just want to get unsubscribed out 
of this website

RE: Load balancing

[Charles P. Killmer]

I played around with it a little more and noticed that if I close the
browser and reopen the sites, I get different ones working.  It appears
that Tomcat is setting a cookie to "stick" me to a particular worker.
So it appears that this is not the ideal way to have one server, many
sites, each with many host names.

Charles 

-Original Message-
From: Charles P. Killmer 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 3:14 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Load balancing

Well I have it set up like this, but it isnt working quite right.

Workers2.properties
[shm:]
info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers
file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm size=100

[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=SITE1
route=SITE1
lbfactor=1
local_worker=1 

[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=SITE2
route=SITE2
lbfactor=1
local_worker=1 

[uri:/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=/



Server.xml


  
  
  



  
factory
 
org.apache.catalina.users.MemoryUserDatabaseFactory
  
  
pathname
conf/tomcat-users.xml
  

  
  









  
  

  
  
  









  
  

  



I have for host pointing to each IP.  This is my hosts file

172.16.10.39site-1.com  Works
172.16.10.39www.site-1.com  Gives me site2's content
172.16.10.39other.site-1.comWorks
172.16.10.39site1.com   Works
172.16.10.39www.site1.com   Works
172.16.10.39other.site1.com Works

172.16.10.38site-2.com  Works
172.16.10.38www.site-2.com  Gives me site1's content
172.16.10.38other.site-2.comWorks
172.16.10.38site2.com   Works
172.16.10.38www.site2.com   Works
172.16.10.38other.site2.com Works


This is very weird.
Any ideas?
Charles

 

-Original Message-
From: Mike Curwen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 4:49 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Load balancing

the docs for jk2 suggest :

"tomcatId" is "Automatically set to the localname ( host:port )" and
that it "Must match the JVM route on tomcat the server.xml Engine
element, for load balancing"
 
So maybe:
[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=site1
 
[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=site2
 
and in server.xml:

   
... etc ...
   



> -Original Message-
> From: Charles P. Killmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:33 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Load balancing
> 
> 
> I have two sites set up and currently they are acting like they are 
> load balanced.  That's the problem. They shouldn't be.  This is my 
> workers2.properties file.  Does anyone have an idea of why it would be

> alternating between the two sites?
> 
> [shm:]
> info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers 
> file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm size=100
> 
> [channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
> info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
> tomcatId=172.16.10.39:8009
> 
> [channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
> info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
> tomcatId=172.16.10.38:8009
> 
> [uri:/*]
> info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat. context=/
> 
> 
> This is my server.xml
> 
>  
>className="org.apache.catalina.mbeans.ServerLifecycleListener"/>
>className="org.apache.catalina.mbeans.GlobalResourcesLifecycle
> Listener"/
> >
>   
>  value="30"/>
>  type="org.apache.catalina.UserDatabase"/>
> 
>   
> factory
>  
> org.apache.catalina.users.MemoryUserDatabaseFactory
>   
>   
> pathname
> conf/tomcat-users.xml
>   
> 
>   
>   
>  disableUploadTimeout="true" port="8080" 
> address="172.16.10.39" redirectPort="8443">
> 
>  protocol="AJP/1.3" 
> protocolHandlerClassName="org.apache.jk.server.JkCoyoteHandler"
> redirectPort="8443">
> 
> 
>appBase="c:\sites\Site1" unpackWARs="true" autoDeploy="false" 
> xmlValidation="false" xmlNamespaceAware="false&

RE: Load balancing

[Charles P. Killmer]

Well I have it set up like this, but it isnt working quite right.

Workers2.properties
[shm:]
info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers
file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm
size=100

[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=SITE1
route=SITE1
lbfactor=1 
local_worker=1 

[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=SITE2
route=SITE2
lbfactor=1 
local_worker=1 

[uri:/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=/



Server.xml


  
  
  



  
factory
 
org.apache.catalina.users.MemoryUserDatabaseFactory
  
  
pathname
conf/tomcat-users.xml
  

  
  









  
  

  
  
  









  
  

  



I have for host pointing to each IP.  This is my hosts file

172.16.10.39site-1.com  Works
172.16.10.39www.site-1.com  Gives me site2's content
172.16.10.39other.site-1.comWorks
172.16.10.39site1.com   Works
172.16.10.39www.site1.com   Works
172.16.10.39other.site1.com Works

172.16.10.38site-2.com  Works
172.16.10.38www.site-2.com  Gives me site1's content
172.16.10.38other.site-2.comWorks
172.16.10.38site2.com   Works
172.16.10.38www.site2.com   Works
172.16.10.38other.site2.com Works


This is very weird.
Any ideas?
Charles

 

-Original Message-
From: Mike Curwen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 4:49 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Load balancing

the docs for jk2 suggest :

"tomcatId" is "Automatically set to the localname ( host:port )" and
that it "Must match the JVM route on tomcat the server.xml Engine
element, for load balancing"
 
So maybe:
[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=site1
 
[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=site2
 
and in server.xml:

   
... etc ...
   



> -Original Message-
> From: Charles P. Killmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:33 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Load balancing
> 
> 
> I have two sites set up and currently they are acting like they are 
> load balanced.  That's the problem. They shouldn't be.  This is my 
> workers2.properties file.  Does anyone have an idea of why it would be

> alternating between the two sites?
> 
> [shm:]
> info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers 
> file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm size=100
> 
> [channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
> info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol 
> tomcatId=172.16.10.39:8009
> 
> [channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
> info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol 
> tomcatId=172.16.10.38:8009
> 
> [uri:/*]
> info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat. context=/
> 
> 
> This is my server.xml
> 
>  
>className="org.apache.catalina.mbeans.ServerLifecycleListener"/>
>className="org.apache.catalina.mbeans.GlobalResourcesLifecycle
> Listener"/
> >
>   
>  value="30"/>
>  type="org.apache.catalina.UserDatabase"/>
> 
>   
> factory
>  
> org.apache.catalina.users.MemoryUserDatabaseFactory
>   
>   
> pathname
> conf/tomcat-users.xml
>   
> 
>   
>   
>  disableUploadTimeout="true" port="8080" 
> address="172.16.10.39" redirectPort="8443">
> 
>  protocol="AJP/1.3" 
> protocolHandlerClassName="org.apache.jk.server.JkCoyoteHandler"
> redirectPort="8443">
> 
> 
>appBase="c:\sites\Site1" unpackWARs="true" autoDeploy="false" 
> xmlValidation="false" xmlNamespaceAware="false">
>   
>className="org.apache.catalina.authenticator.SingleSignOn" debug="0"/>
>directory="logs"  prefix="client-domain." suffix=".txt" 
> pattern="common" resolveHosts="false"/>
>directory="logs"  prefix="client-domain2." suffix=".txt" 
> timestamp="true"/>
> 
>prefix="Site1_log." suf

RE: Load balancing

[Mike Curwen]

the docs for jk2 suggest :

"tomcatId" is "Automatically set to the localname ( host:port )" and
that it "Must match the JVM route on tomcat the server.xml Engine
element, for load balancing"
 
So maybe:
[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol 
tomcatId=site1
 
[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol 
tomcatId=site2
 
and in server.xml:

   
... etc ...
   



> -Original Message-
> From: Charles P. Killmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:33 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Load balancing
> 
> 
> I have two sites set up and currently they are acting like 
> they are load balanced.  That's the problem. They shouldn't 
> be.  This is my workers2.properties file.  Does anyone have 
> an idea of why it would be alternating between the two sites?
> 
> [shm:]
> info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers 
> file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm 
> size=100
> 
> [channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
> info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 
> protocol tomcatId=172.16.10.39:8009
> 
> [channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
> info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 
> protocol tomcatId=172.16.10.38:8009
> 
> [uri:/*]
> info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat. context=/
> 
> 
> This is my server.xml
> 
> 
> 
>className="org.apache.catalina.mbeans.ServerLifecycleListener"/>
>className="org.apache.catalina.mbeans.GlobalResourcesLifecycle
> Listener"/
> >
>   
>  value="30"/>
>  type="org.apache.catalina.UserDatabase"/>
> 
>   
> factory
>  
> org.apache.catalina.users.MemoryUserDatabaseFactory
>   
>   
> pathname
> conf/tomcat-users.xml
>   
> 
>   
>   
>  disableUploadTimeout="true" port="8080" 
> address="172.16.10.39" redirectPort="8443">
> 
>  protocol="AJP/1.3" 
> protocolHandlerClassName="org.apache.jk.server.JkCoyoteHandler"
> redirectPort="8443">
> 
> 
>appBase="c:\sites\Site1" unpackWARs="true" autoDeploy="false" 
> xmlValidation="false" xmlNamespaceAware="false">
>   
>className="org.apache.catalina.authenticator.SingleSignOn" debug="0"/>
>directory="logs"  prefix="client-domain." suffix=".txt" 
> pattern="common" resolveHosts="false"/>
>directory="logs"  prefix="client-domain2." suffix=".txt" 
> timestamp="true"/>
> 
>prefix="Site1_log." suffix=".txt" timestamp="true"/>
>   
> 
>   
> 
>   
>  disableUploadTimeout="true" port="8080" 
> address="172.16.10.38" redirectPort="8443">
> 
>  protocol="AJP/1.3" 
> protocolHandlerClassName="org.apache.jk.server.JkCoyoteHandler"
> redirectPort="8443">
> 
> 
>appBase="c:\sites\Site2" unpackWARs="true" autoDeploy="false" 
> xmlValidation="false" xmlNamespaceAware="false">
>   
>className="org.apache.catalina.authenticator.SingleSignOn" debug="0"/>
>directory="logs"  prefix="client-domain." suffix=".txt" 
> pattern="common" resolveHosts="false"/>
>directory="logs"  prefix="client-domain2." suffix=".txt" 
> timestamp="true"/>
> 
>prefix="Site2_log." suffix=".txt" timestamp="true"/>
>   
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> I have a file called test.jsp in the root of each site.  If I 
> run with this setup, I get site1's test.jsp then if I hit 
> refresh I get site2's test.jsp.
> 
> This is IIS using the Isapi_redirector.dll to proxy requests 
> to the tomcat engine.
> 
> Thanks for any help
> Charles Killmer
> 
> -
> 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: Load balancing

[Charles P. Killmer]

Can I do something like this?

[shm:]
info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers
file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm size=100

[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=172.16.10.39:8009

[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=172.16.10.38:8009

[uri:172.16.10.39/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=Site1/
 
[uri:172.16.10.38/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=Site2/




Charles
 


-Original Message-
From: Charles P. Killmer 
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:58 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Load balancing

Well heres my problem then.  I have two sites.  Site1.com and Site2.com.
I need to use jsp.  And I want to be able to have the default file jsp.
www.site1.com/index.jsp and www.site2.com/index.jsp.  I believe this
requires the two sites to have the same context format.  Context=/

Is there a way to do this?  Should I be looking at something other than
tomcat?

Thank You
Charles

-Original Message-
From: HIRODE,KARTHEEK (HP-Boise,ex1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:55 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Load balancing


Charles

Since you have the same context being used for both sites, the traffic
gets load-balanced across both sites. 
[uri:/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=/

If you need certain kinds of traffic to go to one site and certain
others to go to the other site, then you will need to specific different
contexts for the two sites.
-- Kartheek Hirode



-Original Message-
From: Charles P. Killmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 2:33 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Load balancing


I have two sites set up and currently they are acting like they are load
balanced.  That's the problem. They shouldn't be.  This is my
workers2.properties file.  Does anyone have an idea of why it would be
alternating between the two sites?

[shm:]
info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers
file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm size=100

[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=172.16.10.39:8009

[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=172.16.10.38:8009

[uri:/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=/


This is my server.xml



  
  
  



  
factory
 
org.apache.catalina.users.MemoryUserDatabaseFactory
  
  
pathname
conf/tomcat-users.xml
  

  
  











  
  

  

  











  
  


  



I have a file called test.jsp in the root of each site.  If I run with
this setup, I get site1's test.jsp then if I hit refresh I get site2's
test.jsp.

This is IIS using the Isapi_redirector.dll to proxy requests to the
tomcat engine.

Thanks for any help
Charles Killmer

-
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]


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

RE: Load balancing

[Charles P. Killmer]

Well heres my problem then.  I have two sites.  Site1.com and Site2.com.
I need to use jsp.  And I want to be able to have the default file jsp.
www.site1.com/index.jsp and www.site2.com/index.jsp.  I believe this
requires the two sites to have the same context format.  Context=/

Is there a way to do this?  Should I be looking at something other than
tomcat?

Thank You
Charles

-Original Message-
From: HIRODE,KARTHEEK (HP-Boise,ex1) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:55 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Load balancing


Charles

Since you have the same context being used for both sites, the traffic
gets load-balanced across both sites. 
[uri:/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=/

If you need certain kinds of traffic to go to one site and certain
others to go to the other site, then you will need to specific different
contexts for the two sites.
-- Kartheek Hirode



-Original Message-
From: Charles P. Killmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 2:33 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Load balancing


I have two sites set up and currently they are acting like they are load
balanced.  That's the problem. They shouldn't be.  This is my
workers2.properties file.  Does anyone have an idea of why it would be
alternating between the two sites?

[shm:]
info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers
file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm size=100

[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=172.16.10.39:8009

[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=172.16.10.38:8009

[uri:/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=/


This is my server.xml



  
  
  



  
factory
 
org.apache.catalina.users.MemoryUserDatabaseFactory
  
  
pathname
conf/tomcat-users.xml
  

  
  











  
  

  

  











  
  


  



I have a file called test.jsp in the root of each site.  If I run with
this setup, I get site1's test.jsp then if I hit refresh I get site2's
test.jsp.

This is IIS using the Isapi_redirector.dll to proxy requests to the
tomcat engine.

Thanks for any help
Charles Killmer

-
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]

RE: Load balancing

[HIRODE,KARTHEEK (HP-Boise,ex1)]

Charles

Since you have the same context being used for both sites, the traffic gets
load-balanced across both sites. 
[uri:/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=/

If you need certain kinds of traffic to go to one site and certain others to
go to the other site, then you will need to specific different contexts for
the two sites.
-- Kartheek Hirode



-Original Message-
From: Charles P. Killmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 2:33 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Load balancing


I have two sites set up and currently they are acting like they are load
balanced.  That's the problem. They shouldn't be.  This is my
workers2.properties file.  Does anyone have an idea of why it would be
alternating between the two sites?

[shm:]
info=Shared memory file. Required for multiprocess servers 
file=C:\Tomcat\work\jk2.shm 
size=100

[channel.socket:172.16.10.39:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=172.16.10.39:8009

[channel.socket:172.16.10.38:8009]
info=Ajp13 worker, connects to tomcat instance using AJP 1.3 protocol
tomcatId=172.16.10.38:8009

[uri:/*]
info=JSP examples, map requests for all JSP pages to Tomcat.
context=/


This is my server.xml



  
  
  



  
factory
 
org.apache.catalina.users.MemoryUserDatabaseFactory
  
  
pathname
conf/tomcat-users.xml
  

  
  











  
  

  

  











  
  


  



I have a file called test.jsp in the root of each site.  If I run with
this setup, I get site1's test.jsp then if I hit refresh I get site2's
test.jsp.

This is IIS using the Isapi_redirector.dll to proxy requests to the
tomcat engine.

Thanks for any help
Charles Killmer

-
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: Load-Balancing

[QM]

On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 12:36:49PM -0400, Adam T. Gautier wrote:

: The configuration would be easier, definatly...

"configuration," maybe. 
"maintenance," probably not.  ;)

One of my clients had a large-scale J2EE setup. (Not Tomcat, but bear
with me.)  Several VMs ran on the server, but a single VM would host up
to, say, 5-6 apps.

Coordination between the apps was a headache.  Code migrations required
a VM restart; app X didn't want the downtime when app Y had to do a code
push.  There were also several conflicts over intra-VM resources: no one
wanted to share a container with a memory hog...

etc, etc, etc.

-QM

-- 

software  -- http://www.brandxdev.net
tech news -- http://www.RoarNetworX.com


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

RE: Load-Balancing

[Ralph Einfeldt]

- stability
  No more to say than Yoav.

- performance

  You may observe better performance with several vms on one server:
- Depending on the quality of the thread implementation 
  in your java vm and the os.
- Depending on the quality of the gc implementation you may
  gain performace with smaller heap (n instances need in most
  cases less heap than one instance)

  
The only way to be shure about that is to test your application 
in your environment with the expected load behaviour.
  

- resources
  With n instances
- you need more total memory (JDK 1.5 will cut this down a bit).
- you may need more open db connections in the pool.

- maintainance
  

> -Original Message-
> From: Adam T. Gautier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 6:37 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Load-Balancing
> 
> 
> I have a three server configuration with 1 Apache (httpd) and 
> 2 Tomcat 
> (10 instances a piece) servers.  The configuration is working 
> but it is 
> a little complicated.  I choose this configuration for 
> performance.  I 
> loaded the tomcat servers with lots of RAM and let the 
> multiple instance 
> run as independant processes under linux.  This would allow, 
> I beleieve 
> for beter CPU usage.  There were serveral other reasons for 
> my original 
> choice of load balancing across multiple instances on 
> multiple machines 
> which I won't go into unless asked. But, my question is this.  Is it 
> needed?  Can I get the same performance  from single tomcat 
> instances on 
> the two boxes (rely on threads instead of POSIX proccesses)?  
> Wouldn't 
> running 1 JVM instead of 10 provide a better use of memory 
> per machine?  
> The configuration would be easier, definatly...  What are the 
> thought of 
> the others in this group?  Thanks...
> 
> 
>  [ Apache 10.10.10.20]
>|
>|
>  ||
> [Tomcat 10.10.10.100]  [Tomcat 10.10.10.101]
>  |
>|
>  [APP01-01][APP02-01]
> ...   
>   ...
>  [APP01-10] [APP02-10]
> 
> 
> 
> -
> 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: Load-Balancing

[Shapira, Yoav]

Hi,
With one tomcat instance ( = 1 JVM) running 10 apps, if one causes the
machine to crash for whatever reason (malicious code, infinite loop,
OutOfMemoryError, etc.), the other 9 are hosed as well.  Thus separation
is frequently desirable.

Yoav Shapira
Millennium Research Informatics


>-Original Message-
>From: Adam T. Gautier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 12:37 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: Load-Balancing
>
>I have a three server configuration with 1 Apache (httpd) and 2 Tomcat
>(10 instances a piece) servers.  The configuration is working but it is
>a little complicated.  I choose this configuration for performance.  I
>loaded the tomcat servers with lots of RAM and let the multiple
instance
>run as independant processes under linux.  This would allow, I beleieve
>for beter CPU usage.  There were serveral other reasons for my original
>choice of load balancing across multiple instances on multiple machines
>which I won't go into unless asked. But, my question is this.  Is it
>needed?  Can I get the same performance  from single tomcat instances
on
>the two boxes (rely on threads instead of POSIX proccesses)?  Wouldn't
>running 1 JVM instead of 10 provide a better use of memory per machine?
>The configuration would be easier, definatly...  What are the thought
of
>the others in this group?  Thanks...
>
>
> [ Apache 10.10.10.20]
>   |
>   |
> ||
>[Tomcat 10.10.10.100]  [Tomcat 10.10.10.101]
> |
|
> [APP01-01][APP02-01]
>...
...
> [APP01-10] [APP02-10]
>
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and 
may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged.  This 
e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be 
saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else.  If you are not the(an) 
intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system 
and notify the sender.  Thank you.


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

Re: load balancing jk2 how to wait till context is truely available

[Frank Duffner]

seems I just found myself a little workaround for this problem by 
setting the timeout property of the loadbalancer to 60.
now instead of showing the 500 error from tomcat jk2 waits up to 60 
seconds, which is far long enough for the context to load.
so no 500 errors no more. Still if someone knows a better way, I'd like 
to hear from it.

frank

Frank Duffner wrote:

hi everyone,

I've got two Jboss (alternatively 2 tomcat) instances working with jk2 
and load balancing with level failover.
So everything works beautifull -> when my first server is down, the 
second one fills the gap.

Problem now is: when server1 restarts jk2 sends all requests to him, 
allthough he's not yet truely ready - hasn't loaded the necessary 
context .
So I get an 500 error from tomcat, which is really stupid cause my 
backup server could still handle the requests.

So my question is: Is there a way to tell jk2 to wait till a certain 
context is loaded before switching back.

thanks for reply,
frank
-
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: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Angus Mezick]

The docs at
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-4.1-doc/jk2/jk2/configwebcom.htm
l#How%20Load%20Balancing%20Works have been improved.  Try reading them
again.

> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:17 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have set up four tomcat 5.0 servers for load balancing 
> using an apache2
> server and mod_jk2 on RedHat 9.0.  The trouble that I am 
> having is that most of
> the user sessions are routed to only one of the tomcat 
> servers even though the
> lb_factor for all is the same, 10.  All tomcat servers seem 
> to be working since
> I can disable all but one in the workers2.properties file to 
> force that tomcat
> server to be used.  Chnaging the lb_factor can also cause a 
> different tomcat
> server to be used most of the time, but I haven't figured out 
> how to control
> the balancing by lb_factor.
> 
> Below is the workers2.properties file that I am using.
> 
> Thanks for any help you can provide,
> -Tom
> 
> # workers2.properties 
> 
> [logger]
> level=DEBUG
> 
> [config:]
> debug=0
> debugEnv=0
> 
> [uriMap:]
> info=Maps the requests. Options: debug
> debug=0
> 
> # Alternate file logger
> [logger.file:0]
> level=DEBUG
> file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.log
> 
> #[shm:]
> #info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status 
> with multiprocess
> servers
> #file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.shm
> #size=100
> #debug=0
> #disabled=0
> 
> [workerEnv:]
> info=Global server options
> debug=0
> timing=1
> # Default Native Logger (apache2 or win32 )
> # can be overriden to a file logger, useful
> # when tracing win32 related issues
> #logger=logger.file:0
> 
> [lb:lb]
> ver=1
> info=Default load balancer.
> debug=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psahammerhead.
> debug=0
> disabled=0
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psahammerhead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psashovelhead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psashovelhead.
> debug=0
> disabled=0
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psashovelhead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psabonnethead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psabonnethead.
> debug=0
> disabled=1
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psabonnethead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psawinghead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psawinghead.
> debug=0
> disabled=1
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psawinghead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [status:status]
> info=Status worker, displays runtime informations
> 
> [uri:/jkstatus]
> group=status:status
> 
> # Map the Tomcat examples webbapp
> [uri:/myapp/*]
> info=Map the whole webapp
> group=lb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
>   
> __
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
> 
> -
> 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: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Thomas D. Zeimet]

HI again,

Are you using the AJP13 connector in tomcat or did you install and configure
the coyote connector.

Thanks,
-Tom

--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Hmm. I commented out the shm.file line in my jk2.properties because it
> doesn't seem to be working, but I just did a test with it uncommented, LD
> still works fine. 
> However, if I use anything other than file=anon in the workers2.properties
> file, I don't get the Scoreboard info on the jkstatus page, kind of strange.
> Yang
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 4:55 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Does the shm play a role in this?  I note that you have the following:
> [shm]
> info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
> servers.
> file=anon
> #size=104856
> #debug=1
> 
> Do your tomcat servers have a corresponding entry in their jk2.properties
> file?
>  Like this?
> 
> channelSocket.port=8019
> shm.file=/mnt/logs/jk2.shm
> 
> Is this even necessary for load balancing?
> 
> -Tom
> 
> 
> --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yes.
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 9:42 AM
> > To: Tomcat Users List
> > Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > 
> > Thanks.  The only change that you made to the tomcat server.xml conf file
> is
> > assigning your timcatid values to the jvmRoute property, correct?
> > 
> >  > jvmRoute="psahammerhead">
> > 
> > -Tom
> > 
> > --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > This is pretty much what I have and it works fine.
> > > [logger]
> > > level=DEBUG
> > > [config:]
> > > debug=0
> > > debigEnv=0
> > > 
> > > [uriMap:]
> > > info=Maps the requests, Options: debug
> > > debug=0
> > > 
> > > # Alternate file logger
> > > [logger.file:0]
> > > level=DEBUG
> > > file=/usr/local/apache/logs/jk2.log
> > > 
> > > [shm]
> > > info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with
> multiprocess
> > > servers.
> > > file=anon
> > > #size=104856
> > > #debug=1
> > > 
> > > [workerEnv:]
> > > info=Global server options
> > > debug=0
> > > logger=logger.file:0
> > > 
> > > # Defines a load balancer named lb. Use even if you only have one
> machine.
> > > [lb:lb]
> > > info=Default Load Balancer
> > > debug=10
> > > 
> > > # Example socket channel, override port and host.
> > > [channel.socket:localhost:8009]
> > > port=8009
> > > host=127.0.0.1
> > > lb_factor=5
> > > tomcatid=tomcat1
> > > 
> > > # Second Scoket Channel
> > > [channel.socket:localhost:8019]
> > > port=8019
> > > host=127.0.0.1
> > > lb_factor=10
> > > tomcatid=tomcat2
> > > 
> > > # Third Scoket Channel
> > > [channel.socket:localhost:8029]
> > > port=8029
> > > host=127.0.0.1
> > > lb_factor=10
> > > tomcatid=tomcat3
> > > 
> > > # define the worker
> > > [ajp13:localhost:8009]
> > > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8009
> > > group=lb
> > > 
> > > # define the second worker
> > > [ajp13:localhost:8019]
> > > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8019
> > > group=lb
> > > 
> > > # define the Third worker
> > > [ajp13:localhost:8029]
> > > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8029
> > > group=lb
> > > 
> > > # Map the Tomcat examples webapp to the Web server uri space
> > > [uri:/jsp-examples/*]
> > > info=JSP Examples
> > > group=lb
> > > 
> > > 
> > > [uri:/webtest/*]
> > > info=Test JSP Page
> > > group=lb
> > > 
> > > [status:]
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:46 AM
> > > To: Tomcat Users List
> > > Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > > 
> > > Yes.  I did a full stop and start of apache.  There are no errors in the
> > log
> > > files either.  Do you, or any

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Yang Xiao]

Hi,
Hmm. I commented out the shm.file line in my jk2.properties because it
doesn't seem to be working, but I just did a test with it uncommented, LD
still works fine. 
However, if I use anything other than file=anon in the workers2.properties
file, I don't get the Scoreboard info on the jkstatus page, kind of strange.
Yang


-Original Message-
From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 4:55 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

Does the shm play a role in this?  I note that you have the following:
[shm]
info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
servers.
file=anon
#size=104856
#debug=1

Do your tomcat servers have a corresponding entry in their jk2.properties
file?
 Like this?

channelSocket.port=8019
shm.file=/mnt/logs/jk2.shm

Is this even necessary for load balancing?

-Tom


--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 9:42 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Thanks.  The only change that you made to the tomcat server.xml conf file
is
> assigning your timcatid values to the jvmRoute property, correct?
> 
>  jvmRoute="psahammerhead">
> 
> -Tom
> 
> --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is pretty much what I have and it works fine.
> > [logger]
> > level=DEBUG
> > [config:]
> > debug=0
> > debigEnv=0
> > 
> > [uriMap:]
> > info=Maps the requests, Options: debug
> > debug=0
> > 
> > # Alternate file logger
> > [logger.file:0]
> > level=DEBUG
> > file=/usr/local/apache/logs/jk2.log
> > 
> > [shm]
> > info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with
multiprocess
> > servers.
> > file=anon
> > #size=104856
> > #debug=1
> > 
> > [workerEnv:]
> > info=Global server options
> > debug=0
> > logger=logger.file:0
> > 
> > # Defines a load balancer named lb. Use even if you only have one
machine.
> > [lb:lb]
> > info=Default Load Balancer
> > debug=10
> > 
> > # Example socket channel, override port and host.
> > [channel.socket:localhost:8009]
> > port=8009
> > host=127.0.0.1
> > lb_factor=5
> > tomcatid=tomcat1
> > 
> > # Second Scoket Channel
> > [channel.socket:localhost:8019]
> > port=8019
> > host=127.0.0.1
> > lb_factor=10
> > tomcatid=tomcat2
> > 
> > # Third Scoket Channel
> > [channel.socket:localhost:8029]
> > port=8029
> > host=127.0.0.1
> > lb_factor=10
> > tomcatid=tomcat3
> > 
> > # define the worker
> > [ajp13:localhost:8009]
> > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8009
> > group=lb
> > 
> > # define the second worker
> > [ajp13:localhost:8019]
> > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8019
> > group=lb
> > 
> > # define the Third worker
> > [ajp13:localhost:8029]
> > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8029
> > group=lb
> > 
> > # Map the Tomcat examples webapp to the Web server uri space
> > [uri:/jsp-examples/*]
> > info=JSP Examples
> > group=lb
> > 
> > 
> > [uri:/webtest/*]
> > info=Test JSP Page
> > group=lb
> > 
> > [status:]
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:46 AM
> > To: Tomcat Users List
> > Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > 
> > Yes.  I did a full stop and start of apache.  There are no errors in the
> log
> > files either.  Do you, or anyone else, have a workers2.properties file
of
> a
> > working system that you are willing to share?  I've gone through all the
> > sections and properties in the latest jakarta jk2 document as well as
> other
> > How-Tos and don't see what I've missed (I'm afraid I don't understand
all
> of
> > it
> > either :).  Does the shm section play a part?  I interpretted it to be
> > needed
> > only if one wants to share session data between the differnet tomcat
> > servers,
> > and does not have anything to do with load balancing.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > -Tom
> > 
> > 
> > --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > Did you restart the Apache2 server? My understanding is JK only
reloads
> it
> > > only if the section you modified in 

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Thomas D. Zeimet]

Does the shm play a role in this?  I note that you have the following:
[shm]
info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
servers.
file=anon
#size=104856
#debug=1

Do your tomcat servers have a corresponding entry in their jk2.properties file?
 Like this?

channelSocket.port=8019
shm.file=/mnt/logs/jk2.shm

Is this even necessary for load balancing?

-Tom


--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 9:42 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Thanks.  The only change that you made to the tomcat server.xml conf file is
> assigning your timcatid values to the jvmRoute property, correct?
> 
>  jvmRoute="psahammerhead">
> 
> -Tom
> 
> --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is pretty much what I have and it works fine.
> > [logger]
> > level=DEBUG
> > [config:]
> > debug=0
> > debigEnv=0
> > 
> > [uriMap:]
> > info=Maps the requests, Options: debug
> > debug=0
> > 
> > # Alternate file logger
> > [logger.file:0]
> > level=DEBUG
> > file=/usr/local/apache/logs/jk2.log
> > 
> > [shm]
> > info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
> > servers.
> > file=anon
> > #size=104856
> > #debug=1
> > 
> > [workerEnv:]
> > info=Global server options
> > debug=0
> > logger=logger.file:0
> > 
> > # Defines a load balancer named lb. Use even if you only have one machine.
> > [lb:lb]
> > info=Default Load Balancer
> > debug=10
> > 
> > # Example socket channel, override port and host.
> > [channel.socket:localhost:8009]
> > port=8009
> > host=127.0.0.1
> > lb_factor=5
> > tomcatid=tomcat1
> > 
> > # Second Scoket Channel
> > [channel.socket:localhost:8019]
> > port=8019
> > host=127.0.0.1
> > lb_factor=10
> > tomcatid=tomcat2
> > 
> > # Third Scoket Channel
> > [channel.socket:localhost:8029]
> > port=8029
> > host=127.0.0.1
> > lb_factor=10
> > tomcatid=tomcat3
> > 
> > # define the worker
> > [ajp13:localhost:8009]
> > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8009
> > group=lb
> > 
> > # define the second worker
> > [ajp13:localhost:8019]
> > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8019
> > group=lb
> > 
> > # define the Third worker
> > [ajp13:localhost:8029]
> > channel=channel.socket:localhost:8029
> > group=lb
> > 
> > # Map the Tomcat examples webapp to the Web server uri space
> > [uri:/jsp-examples/*]
> > info=JSP Examples
> > group=lb
> > 
> > 
> > [uri:/webtest/*]
> > info=Test JSP Page
> > group=lb
> > 
> > [status:]
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:46 AM
> > To: Tomcat Users List
> > Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > 
> > Yes.  I did a full stop and start of apache.  There are no errors in the
> log
> > files either.  Do you, or anyone else, have a workers2.properties file of
> a
> > working system that you are willing to share?  I've gone through all the
> > sections and properties in the latest jakarta jk2 document as well as
> other
> > How-Tos and don't see what I've missed (I'm afraid I don't understand all
> of
> > it
> > either :).  Does the shm section play a part?  I interpretted it to be
> > needed
> > only if one wants to share session data between the differnet tomcat
> > servers,
> > and does not have anything to do with load balancing.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > -Tom
> > 
> > 
> > --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > Did you restart the Apache2 server? My understanding is JK only reloads
> it
> > > only if the section you modified in workers.properties has "ver"
> defined.
> > > Also, check your jk.log and Catalina.log files for errors.
> > > Yang
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 7:09 PM
> > > To: Tomcat Users List
> > > Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > > 
> > > Thanks but it doesn't seem to make any difference.  For e

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Yang Xiao]

Yes.

-Original Message-
From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 9:42 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

Thanks.  The only change that you made to the tomcat server.xml conf file is
assigning your timcatid values to the jvmRoute property, correct?



-Tom

--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is pretty much what I have and it works fine.
> [logger]
> level=DEBUG
> [config:]
> debug=0
> debigEnv=0
> 
> [uriMap:]
> info=Maps the requests, Options: debug
> debug=0
> 
> # Alternate file logger
> [logger.file:0]
> level=DEBUG
> file=/usr/local/apache/logs/jk2.log
> 
> [shm]
> info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
> servers.
> file=anon
> #size=104856
> #debug=1
> 
> [workerEnv:]
> info=Global server options
> debug=0
> logger=logger.file:0
> 
> # Defines a load balancer named lb. Use even if you only have one machine.
> [lb:lb]
> info=Default Load Balancer
> debug=10
> 
> # Example socket channel, override port and host.
> [channel.socket:localhost:8009]
> port=8009
> host=127.0.0.1
> lb_factor=5
> tomcatid=tomcat1
> 
> # Second Scoket Channel
> [channel.socket:localhost:8019]
> port=8019
> host=127.0.0.1
> lb_factor=10
> tomcatid=tomcat2
> 
> # Third Scoket Channel
> [channel.socket:localhost:8029]
> port=8029
> host=127.0.0.1
> lb_factor=10
> tomcatid=tomcat3
> 
> # define the worker
> [ajp13:localhost:8009]
> channel=channel.socket:localhost:8009
> group=lb
> 
> # define the second worker
> [ajp13:localhost:8019]
> channel=channel.socket:localhost:8019
> group=lb
> 
> # define the Third worker
> [ajp13:localhost:8029]
> channel=channel.socket:localhost:8029
> group=lb
> 
> # Map the Tomcat examples webapp to the Web server uri space
> [uri:/jsp-examples/*]
> info=JSP Examples
> group=lb
> 
> 
> [uri:/webtest/*]
> info=Test JSP Page
> group=lb
> 
> [status:]
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:46 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Yes.  I did a full stop and start of apache.  There are no errors in the
log
> files either.  Do you, or anyone else, have a workers2.properties file of
a
> working system that you are willing to share?  I've gone through all the
> sections and properties in the latest jakarta jk2 document as well as
other
> How-Tos and don't see what I've missed (I'm afraid I don't understand all
of
> it
> either :).  Does the shm section play a part?  I interpretted it to be
> needed
> only if one wants to share session data between the differnet tomcat
> servers,
> and does not have anything to do with load balancing.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Tom
> 
> 
> --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Did you restart the Apache2 server? My understanding is JK only reloads
it
> > only if the section you modified in workers.properties has "ver"
defined.
> > Also, check your jk.log and Catalina.log files for errors.
> > Yang
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 7:09 PM
> > To: Tomcat Users List
> > Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > 
> > Thanks but it doesn't seem to make any difference.  For each tomcat
server
> I
> > added sections like the following:
> > 
> > [ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> > channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> > group=lb
> > tomcatId=psahammerhead
> > 
> > It still only wants to use one of the servers.  There are other
properties
> > that
> > could be used but they're not documented too well.  Any other
suggestions
> > would
> > be greatly appreciated.
> > 
> > -Tom
> > 
> > 
> > --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I think you need to further define the workers with 
> > > 
> > > {ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> > > channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> > > group=lb
> > > ...
> > > etc
> > > 
> > > hope this helps.
> > > Yang
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:17 AM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subj

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Thomas D. Zeimet]

Thanks.  The only change that you made to the tomcat server.xml conf file is
assigning your timcatid values to the jvmRoute property, correct?



-Tom

--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is pretty much what I have and it works fine.
> [logger]
> level=DEBUG
> [config:]
> debug=0
> debigEnv=0
> 
> [uriMap:]
> info=Maps the requests, Options: debug
> debug=0
> 
> # Alternate file logger
> [logger.file:0]
> level=DEBUG
> file=/usr/local/apache/logs/jk2.log
> 
> [shm]
> info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
> servers.
> file=anon
> #size=104856
> #debug=1
> 
> [workerEnv:]
> info=Global server options
> debug=0
> logger=logger.file:0
> 
> # Defines a load balancer named lb. Use even if you only have one machine.
> [lb:lb]
> info=Default Load Balancer
> debug=10
> 
> # Example socket channel, override port and host.
> [channel.socket:localhost:8009]
> port=8009
> host=127.0.0.1
> lb_factor=5
> tomcatid=tomcat1
> 
> # Second Scoket Channel
> [channel.socket:localhost:8019]
> port=8019
> host=127.0.0.1
> lb_factor=10
> tomcatid=tomcat2
> 
> # Third Scoket Channel
> [channel.socket:localhost:8029]
> port=8029
> host=127.0.0.1
> lb_factor=10
> tomcatid=tomcat3
> 
> # define the worker
> [ajp13:localhost:8009]
> channel=channel.socket:localhost:8009
> group=lb
> 
> # define the second worker
> [ajp13:localhost:8019]
> channel=channel.socket:localhost:8019
> group=lb
> 
> # define the Third worker
> [ajp13:localhost:8029]
> channel=channel.socket:localhost:8029
> group=lb
> 
> # Map the Tomcat examples webapp to the Web server uri space
> [uri:/jsp-examples/*]
> info=JSP Examples
> group=lb
> 
> 
> [uri:/webtest/*]
> info=Test JSP Page
> group=lb
> 
> [status:]
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:46 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Yes.  I did a full stop and start of apache.  There are no errors in the log
> files either.  Do you, or anyone else, have a workers2.properties file of a
> working system that you are willing to share?  I've gone through all the
> sections and properties in the latest jakarta jk2 document as well as other
> How-Tos and don't see what I've missed (I'm afraid I don't understand all of
> it
> either :).  Does the shm section play a part?  I interpretted it to be
> needed
> only if one wants to share session data between the differnet tomcat
> servers,
> and does not have anything to do with load balancing.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Tom
> 
> 
> --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Did you restart the Apache2 server? My understanding is JK only reloads it
> > only if the section you modified in workers.properties has "ver" defined.
> > Also, check your jk.log and Catalina.log files for errors.
> > Yang
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 7:09 PM
> > To: Tomcat Users List
> > Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > 
> > Thanks but it doesn't seem to make any difference.  For each tomcat server
> I
> > added sections like the following:
> > 
> > [ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> > channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> > group=lb
> > tomcatId=psahammerhead
> > 
> > It still only wants to use one of the servers.  There are other properties
> > that
> > could be used but they're not documented too well.  Any other suggestions
> > would
> > be greatly appreciated.
> > 
> > -Tom
> > 
> > 
> > --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I think you need to further define the workers with 
> > > 
> > > {ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> > > channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> > > group=lb
> > > ...
> > > etc
> > > 
> > > hope this helps.
> > > Yang
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:17 AM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I have set up four tomcat 5.0 servers for load balancing using an
> apache2
> &

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Yang Xiao]

This is pretty much what I have and it works fine.
[logger]
level=DEBUG
[config:]
debug=0
debigEnv=0

[uriMap:]
info=Maps the requests, Options: debug
debug=0

# Alternate file logger
[logger.file:0]
level=DEBUG
file=/usr/local/apache/logs/jk2.log

[shm]
info=Scoreboard. Requried for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
servers.
file=anon
#size=104856
#debug=1

[workerEnv:]
info=Global server options
debug=0
logger=logger.file:0

# Defines a load balancer named lb. Use even if you only have one machine.
[lb:lb]
info=Default Load Balancer
debug=10

# Example socket channel, override port and host.
[channel.socket:localhost:8009]
port=8009
host=127.0.0.1
lb_factor=5
tomcatid=tomcat1

# Second Scoket Channel
[channel.socket:localhost:8019]
port=8019
host=127.0.0.1
lb_factor=10
tomcatid=tomcat2

# Third Scoket Channel
[channel.socket:localhost:8029]
port=8029
host=127.0.0.1
lb_factor=10
tomcatid=tomcat3

# define the worker
[ajp13:localhost:8009]
channel=channel.socket:localhost:8009
group=lb

# define the second worker
[ajp13:localhost:8019]
channel=channel.socket:localhost:8019
group=lb

# define the Third worker
[ajp13:localhost:8029]
channel=channel.socket:localhost:8029
group=lb

# Map the Tomcat examples webapp to the Web server uri space
[uri:/jsp-examples/*]
info=JSP Examples
group=lb


[uri:/webtest/*]
info=Test JSP Page
group=lb

[status:]

-Original Message-
From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 7:46 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

Yes.  I did a full stop and start of apache.  There are no errors in the log
files either.  Do you, or anyone else, have a workers2.properties file of a
working system that you are willing to share?  I've gone through all the
sections and properties in the latest jakarta jk2 document as well as other
How-Tos and don't see what I've missed (I'm afraid I don't understand all of
it
either :).  Does the shm section play a part?  I interpretted it to be
needed
only if one wants to share session data between the differnet tomcat
servers,
and does not have anything to do with load balancing.

Thanks,
-Tom


--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Did you restart the Apache2 server? My understanding is JK only reloads it
> only if the section you modified in workers.properties has "ver" defined.
> Also, check your jk.log and Catalina.log files for errors.
> Yang
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 7:09 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Thanks but it doesn't seem to make any difference.  For each tomcat server
I
> added sections like the following:
> 
> [ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psahammerhead
> 
> It still only wants to use one of the servers.  There are other properties
> that
> could be used but they're not documented too well.  Any other suggestions
> would
> be greatly appreciated.
> 
> -Tom
> 
> 
> --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I think you need to further define the workers with 
> > 
> > {ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> > channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> > group=lb
> > ...
> > etc
> > 
> > hope this helps.
> > Yang
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:17 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I have set up four tomcat 5.0 servers for load balancing using an
apache2
> > server and mod_jk2 on RedHat 9.0.  The trouble that I am having is that
> most
> > of
> > the user sessions are routed to only one of the tomcat servers even
though
> > the
> > lb_factor for all is the same, 10.  All tomcat servers seem to be
working
> > since
> > I can disable all but one in the workers2.properties file to force that
> > tomcat
> > server to be used.  Chnaging the lb_factor can also cause a different
> tomcat
> > server to be used most of the time, but I haven't figured out how to
> control
> > the balancing by lb_factor.
> > 
> > Below is the workers2.properties file that I am using.
> > 
> > Thanks for any help you can provide,
> > -Tom
> > 
> > # workers2.properties 
> > 
> > [logger]
> > level=DEBUG
> > 
> > [config:]
> > debug=0
> > debugEnv=0
> > 
> > [uriMap:]
> > info=Maps the req

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Thomas D. Zeimet]

Yes.  I did a full stop and start of apache.  There are no errors in the log
files either.  Do you, or anyone else, have a workers2.properties file of a
working system that you are willing to share?  I've gone through all the
sections and properties in the latest jakarta jk2 document as well as other
How-Tos and don't see what I've missed (I'm afraid I don't understand all of it
either :).  Does the shm section play a part?  I interpretted it to be needed
only if one wants to share session data between the differnet tomcat servers,
and does not have anything to do with load balancing.

Thanks,
-Tom


--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Did you restart the Apache2 server? My understanding is JK only reloads it
> only if the section you modified in workers.properties has "ver" defined.
> Also, check your jk.log and Catalina.log files for errors.
> Yang
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 7:09 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Thanks but it doesn't seem to make any difference.  For each tomcat server I
> added sections like the following:
> 
> [ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psahammerhead
> 
> It still only wants to use one of the servers.  There are other properties
> that
> could be used but they're not documented too well.  Any other suggestions
> would
> be greatly appreciated.
> 
> -Tom
> 
> 
> --- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I think you need to further define the workers with 
> > 
> > {ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> > channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> > group=lb
> > ...
> > etc
> > 
> > hope this helps.
> > Yang
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:17 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I have set up four tomcat 5.0 servers for load balancing using an apache2
> > server and mod_jk2 on RedHat 9.0.  The trouble that I am having is that
> most
> > of
> > the user sessions are routed to only one of the tomcat servers even though
> > the
> > lb_factor for all is the same, 10.  All tomcat servers seem to be working
> > since
> > I can disable all but one in the workers2.properties file to force that
> > tomcat
> > server to be used.  Chnaging the lb_factor can also cause a different
> tomcat
> > server to be used most of the time, but I haven't figured out how to
> control
> > the balancing by lb_factor.
> > 
> > Below is the workers2.properties file that I am using.
> > 
> > Thanks for any help you can provide,
> > -Tom
> > 
> > # workers2.properties 
> > 
> > [logger]
> > level=DEBUG
> > 
> > [config:]
> > debug=0
> > debugEnv=0
> > 
> > [uriMap:]
> > info=Maps the requests. Options: debug
> > debug=0
> > 
> > # Alternate file logger
> > [logger.file:0]
> > level=DEBUG
> > file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.log
> > 
> > #[shm:]
> > #info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status with
> multiprocess
> > servers
> > #file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.shm
> > #size=100
> > #debug=0
> > #disabled=0
> > 
> > [workerEnv:]
> > info=Global server options
> > debug=0
> > timing=1
> > # Default Native Logger (apache2 or win32 )
> > # can be overriden to a file logger, useful
> > # when tracing win32 related issues
> > #logger=logger.file:0
> > 
> > [lb:lb]
> > ver=1
> > info=Default load balancer.
> > debug=10
> > 
> > [channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009]
> > ver=1
> > graceful=0
> > info=A tomcat instance - psahammerhead.
> > debug=0
> > disabled=0
> > group=lb
> > tomcatId=psahammerhead
> > lb_factor=10
> > 
> > [channel.socket:psashovelhead:8009]
> > ver=1
> > graceful=0
> > info=A tomcat instance - psashovelhead.
> > debug=0
> > disabled=0
> > group=lb
> > tomcatId=psashovelhead
> > lb_factor=10
> > 
> > [channel.socket:psabonnethead:8009]
> > ver=1
> > graceful=0
> > info=A tomcat instance - psabonnethead.
> > debug=0
> > disabled=1
> > group=lb
> > tomcatId=psabonnethea

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Yang Xiao]

Hi,
Did you restart the Apache2 server? My understanding is JK only reloads it
only if the section you modified in workers.properties has "ver" defined.
Also, check your jk.log and Catalina.log files for errors.
Yang

-Original Message-
From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 7:09 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

Thanks but it doesn't seem to make any difference.  For each tomcat server I
added sections like the following:

[ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
group=lb
tomcatId=psahammerhead

It still only wants to use one of the servers.  There are other properties
that
could be used but they're not documented too well.  Any other suggestions
would
be greatly appreciated.

-Tom


--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I think you need to further define the workers with 
> 
> {ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> group=lb
> ...
> etc
> 
> hope this helps.
> Yang
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:17 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have set up four tomcat 5.0 servers for load balancing using an apache2
> server and mod_jk2 on RedHat 9.0.  The trouble that I am having is that
most
> of
> the user sessions are routed to only one of the tomcat servers even though
> the
> lb_factor for all is the same, 10.  All tomcat servers seem to be working
> since
> I can disable all but one in the workers2.properties file to force that
> tomcat
> server to be used.  Chnaging the lb_factor can also cause a different
tomcat
> server to be used most of the time, but I haven't figured out how to
control
> the balancing by lb_factor.
> 
> Below is the workers2.properties file that I am using.
> 
> Thanks for any help you can provide,
> -Tom
> 
> # workers2.properties 
> 
> [logger]
> level=DEBUG
> 
> [config:]
> debug=0
> debugEnv=0
> 
> [uriMap:]
> info=Maps the requests. Options: debug
> debug=0
> 
> # Alternate file logger
> [logger.file:0]
> level=DEBUG
> file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.log
> 
> #[shm:]
> #info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status with
multiprocess
> servers
> #file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.shm
> #size=100
> #debug=0
> #disabled=0
> 
> [workerEnv:]
> info=Global server options
> debug=0
> timing=1
> # Default Native Logger (apache2 or win32 )
> # can be overriden to a file logger, useful
> # when tracing win32 related issues
> #logger=logger.file:0
> 
> [lb:lb]
> ver=1
> info=Default load balancer.
> debug=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psahammerhead.
> debug=0
> disabled=0
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psahammerhead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psashovelhead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psashovelhead.
> debug=0
> disabled=0
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psashovelhead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psabonnethead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psabonnethead.
> debug=0
> disabled=1
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psabonnethead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psawinghead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psawinghead.
> debug=0
> disabled=1
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psawinghead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [status:status]
> info=Status worker, displays runtime informations
> 
> [uri:/jkstatus]
> group=status:status
> 
> # Map the Tomcat examples webbapp
> [uri:/myapp/*]
> info=Map the whole webapp
> group=lb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
>   
> __
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
> 
> -
> 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]
> 





__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

-
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: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Thomas D. Zeimet]

Thanks but it doesn't seem to make any difference.  For each tomcat server I
added sections like the following:

[ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
group=lb
tomcatId=psahammerhead

It still only wants to use one of the servers.  There are other properties that
could be used but they're not documented too well.  Any other suggestions would
be greatly appreciated.

-Tom


--- Yang Xiao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I think you need to further define the workers with 
> 
> {ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
> channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
> group=lb
> ...
> etc
> 
> hope this helps.
> Yang
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:17 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have set up four tomcat 5.0 servers for load balancing using an apache2
> server and mod_jk2 on RedHat 9.0.  The trouble that I am having is that most
> of
> the user sessions are routed to only one of the tomcat servers even though
> the
> lb_factor for all is the same, 10.  All tomcat servers seem to be working
> since
> I can disable all but one in the workers2.properties file to force that
> tomcat
> server to be used.  Chnaging the lb_factor can also cause a different tomcat
> server to be used most of the time, but I haven't figured out how to control
> the balancing by lb_factor.
> 
> Below is the workers2.properties file that I am using.
> 
> Thanks for any help you can provide,
> -Tom
> 
> # workers2.properties 
> 
> [logger]
> level=DEBUG
> 
> [config:]
> debug=0
> debugEnv=0
> 
> [uriMap:]
> info=Maps the requests. Options: debug
> debug=0
> 
> # Alternate file logger
> [logger.file:0]
> level=DEBUG
> file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.log
> 
> #[shm:]
> #info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
> servers
> #file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.shm
> #size=100
> #debug=0
> #disabled=0
> 
> [workerEnv:]
> info=Global server options
> debug=0
> timing=1
> # Default Native Logger (apache2 or win32 )
> # can be overriden to a file logger, useful
> # when tracing win32 related issues
> #logger=logger.file:0
> 
> [lb:lb]
> ver=1
> info=Default load balancer.
> debug=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psahammerhead.
> debug=0
> disabled=0
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psahammerhead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psashovelhead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psashovelhead.
> debug=0
> disabled=0
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psashovelhead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psabonnethead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psabonnethead.
> debug=0
> disabled=1
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psabonnethead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [channel.socket:psawinghead:8009]
> ver=1
> graceful=0
> info=A tomcat instance - psawinghead.
> debug=0
> disabled=1
> group=lb
> tomcatId=psawinghead
> lb_factor=10
> 
> [status:status]
> info=Status worker, displays runtime informations
> 
> [uri:/jkstatus]
> group=status:status
> 
> # Map the Tomcat examples webbapp
> [uri:/myapp/*]
> info=Map the whole webapp
> group=lb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
>   
> __
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
> 
> -
> 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]
> 





__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

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

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Yang Xiao]

Hi,
I think you need to further define the workers with 

{ajp13:psahammerhead:8009]
channel=channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009
group=lb
...
etc

hope this helps.
Yang



-Original Message-
From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

Hi,

I have set up four tomcat 5.0 servers for load balancing using an apache2
server and mod_jk2 on RedHat 9.0.  The trouble that I am having is that most
of
the user sessions are routed to only one of the tomcat servers even though
the
lb_factor for all is the same, 10.  All tomcat servers seem to be working
since
I can disable all but one in the workers2.properties file to force that
tomcat
server to be used.  Chnaging the lb_factor can also cause a different tomcat
server to be used most of the time, but I haven't figured out how to control
the balancing by lb_factor.

Below is the workers2.properties file that I am using.

Thanks for any help you can provide,
-Tom

# workers2.properties 

[logger]
level=DEBUG

[config:]
debug=0
debugEnv=0

[uriMap:]
info=Maps the requests. Options: debug
debug=0

# Alternate file logger
[logger.file:0]
level=DEBUG
file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.log

#[shm:]
#info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
servers
#file=/usr/local/apache2/logs/jk2.shm
#size=100
#debug=0
#disabled=0

[workerEnv:]
info=Global server options
debug=0
timing=1
# Default Native Logger (apache2 or win32 )
# can be overriden to a file logger, useful
# when tracing win32 related issues
#logger=logger.file:0

[lb:lb]
ver=1
info=Default load balancer.
debug=10

[channel.socket:psahammerhead:8009]
ver=1
graceful=0
info=A tomcat instance - psahammerhead.
debug=0
disabled=0
group=lb
tomcatId=psahammerhead
lb_factor=10

[channel.socket:psashovelhead:8009]
ver=1
graceful=0
info=A tomcat instance - psashovelhead.
debug=0
disabled=0
group=lb
tomcatId=psashovelhead
lb_factor=10

[channel.socket:psabonnethead:8009]
ver=1
graceful=0
info=A tomcat instance - psabonnethead.
debug=0
disabled=1
group=lb
tomcatId=psabonnethead
lb_factor=10

[channel.socket:psawinghead:8009]
ver=1
graceful=0
info=A tomcat instance - psawinghead.
debug=0
disabled=1
group=lb
tomcatId=psawinghead
lb_factor=10

[status:status]
info=Status worker, displays runtime informations

[uri:/jkstatus]
group=status:status

# Map the Tomcat examples webbapp
[uri:/myapp/*]
info=Map the whole webapp
group=lb







__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

-
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: Load balancing and the /manager webapp

[Taximum06]

I don't think you intend this to come to me.

RE: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0

[Ralph Einfeldt]

Some members of this list have reported that the load 
balancing is broken as the instances of mod_jk[2] 
don't know the load of each other. So mod_jk[2] will 
balance to some extend but not as good as it could/should.

> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas D. Zeimet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing with apache2, mod_jk2 & tomcat 5.0
> 
> I have set up four tomcat 5.0 servers for load balancing 
> using an apache2
> server and mod_jk2 on RedHat 9.0.  The trouble that I am 
> having is that most of
> the user sessions are routed to only one of the tomcat 
> servers even though the
> lb_factor for all is the same, 10.  All tomcat servers seem 
> to be working since
> I can disable all but one in the workers2.properties file to 
> force that tomcat

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

Re: load balancing with jk2

[pablo]

Thank you .  It was exactly what I needed to get over the hump.  I just  
did as you said and tested it.  Thanx a million .

On Mar 30, 2004, at 1:45 PM, Chris Egolf wrote:



pablo wrote:
maybe I am just missing something.  I noticed that in my server.xml  
there is a portion that is commented out and is specific to JK2 load  
balancing .

Make sure that for each instance of Tomcat, there is a unique jvmRoute  
attribute in the Engine element of each instance's server.xml.  The  
jvmRoute corresponds to the tomcatId setting in your  
workers2.properties file (see below).  The jvmRoute needs to be unique  
for each instance.  Also, if you're just uncommenting the above in  
your server.xml, you'll need to comment out the other  section  
that doesn't have the jvmRoute attribute.  Maybe that's why Tomcat  
won't start.

Everytime I make an attempt to uncomment this tomcat will not start.
Regardless this is what my workers2.properties looks like. #INSTANCE 1
#Socket Channel, explicity set port and host
[channel.socket:localhost:8009]
info=Ajp13 forwarding over socket
debug=0
tomcatId=localhost:8009
   ^^
This should be the jvmRoute setting you specified in this instance's  
server.xml.  The other instance below should have a unique tomcatId as  
well.

In other words, you've got at least two separate server.xml files, one  
for each instance of Tomcat on localhost.  For instance 1, edit the  
 section and add jvmRoute="jvm1".  For instance 2, edit the  
 section and add jvmRoute"jvm2".  Then, in your  
workers2.properties file, change the tomcatId=jvm1 and tomcatId=jvm2  
in each instance's section.

Hope that's clear.

--  
=== 
=
   Chris Egolf
 http://www.ugholf.net [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]

Re: load balancing with jk2

[Chris Egolf]

pablo wrote:
maybe I am just missing something.  I noticed that in my server.xml 
there is a portion that is commented out and is specific to JK2 load 
balancing .



Make sure that for each instance of Tomcat, there is a unique jvmRoute attribute 
in the Engine element of each instance's server.xml.  The jvmRoute corresponds 
to the tomcatId setting in your workers2.properties file (see below).  The 
jvmRoute needs to be unique for each instance.  Also, if you're just 
uncommenting the above in your server.xml, you'll need to comment out the other 
 section that doesn't have the jvmRoute attribute.  Maybe that's why 
Tomcat won't start.

Everytime I make an attempt to uncomment this tomcat will not start.
Regardless this is what my workers2.properties looks like. 

#INSTANCE 1
#Socket Channel, explicity set port and host
[channel.socket:localhost:8009]
info=Ajp13 forwarding over socket
debug=0
tomcatId=localhost:8009
   ^^
This should be the jvmRoute setting you specified in this instance's server.xml. 
 The other instance below should have a unique tomcatId as well.

In other words, you've got at least two separate server.xml files, one for each 
instance of Tomcat on localhost.  For instance 1, edit the  section and 
add jvmRoute="jvm1".  For instance 2, edit the  section and add 
jvmRoute"jvm2".  Then, in your workers2.properties file, change the 
tomcatId=jvm1 and tomcatId=jvm2 in each instance's section.

Hope that's clear.

--

   Chris Egolf
 http://www.ugholf.net [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: Load balancing for uptime

[Reynir Þór Hübner]

My experience is the same.

hope it helps
-reynir
Angus Mezick wrote:

Disable all of the auto reloading features of tomcat.  The mem leak
seems to be centered there.  Or at least, I haven't had a OOME since I
turned that stuff off.
You would need clustered sessions of some sort.  They either need to be
persisted across the network using filip's code (tomcat 5 has this in
it) or you need to write your own session manager that persists session
data to the DB.
--Angus
 

-Original Message-
From: Derek Clarkson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 1:32 AM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: Load balancing for uptime



Hi all,
	We have an app written in a mix of JSP, servlets and 
struts across 3
instances of apache, tomcat and an RMI server. To say that 
it's a pile of
smelly stuff is an understatement, however it works (mostly) and our
customers depend on it. At least once a week though it 
crashes with out of
memory errors. 

Until we can redesign and fix it we are looking for a way to 
keep it up. One
suggest has been to have two servers running with a common DB 
server, and to
use a load balancer to allow us to keep one server up whilst 
we boot the
other, then vice versa. Thus on a daily basis we can reboot 
both machines
whilst mainting a working system for the users. 

Can anyone see any problems with this ? I'm concerned about 
issue realed to
session management, etc.

Ciao
Derek
__
This email, including attachments, is intended only for the addressee
and may be confidential, privileged and subject to copyright.  If you
have received this email in error, please advise the sender and delete
it.  If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not
use, copy or disclose its content to anyone.  You must not copy or 
communicate to others content that is confidential or subject to 
copyright, unless you have the consent of the content owner.

   

-
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: Load balancing for uptime

[david . landy]

Peter Lin wrote:


In practice, the load on the DB is the killer right?


Peter, 

I have no personal experience, but that's what the docs that I've read say -
the db access becomes the limiting factor.

One further advantage of db-based session vars is that you can see in
real-time what is going on for each session, which is great for logging and
debugging.

David

 
If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please preserve the
confidentiality of it and advise the sender immediately of any error in
transmission. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken, or
omitted to be taken, by an unauthorised recipient in reliance upon the
contents of this e-mail is prohibited. Somerfield cannot accept liability
for any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses so
please carry out your own virus checks before opening an attachment. In
replying to this e-mail you are granting the right for that reply to be
forwarded to any other individual within the business and also to be read by
others. Any views expressed by an individual within this message do not
necessarily reflect the views of Somerfield.  Somerfield reserves the right
to intercept, monitor and record communications for lawful business
purposes.

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

RE: Load balancing for uptime

[Angus Mezick]

Disable all of the auto reloading features of tomcat.  The mem leak
seems to be centered there.  Or at least, I haven't had a OOME since I
turned that stuff off.

You would need clustered sessions of some sort.  They either need to be
persisted across the network using filip's code (tomcat 5 has this in
it) or you need to write your own session manager that persists session
data to the DB.
--Angus

> -Original Message-
> From: Derek Clarkson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 1:32 AM
> To: 'Tomcat Users List'
> Subject: Load balancing for uptime
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all,
>   We have an app written in a mix of JSP, servlets and 
> struts across 3
> instances of apache, tomcat and an RMI server. To say that 
> it's a pile of
> smelly stuff is an understatement, however it works (mostly) and our
> customers depend on it. At least once a week though it 
> crashes with out of
> memory errors. 
> 
> Until we can redesign and fix it we are looking for a way to 
> keep it up. One
> suggest has been to have two servers running with a common DB 
> server, and to
> use a load balancer to allow us to keep one server up whilst 
> we boot the
> other, then vice versa. Thus on a daily basis we can reboot 
> both machines
> whilst mainting a working system for the users. 
> 
> Can anyone see any problems with this ? I'm concerned about 
> issue realed to
> session management, etc.
> 
> Ciao
> Derek
> 
> 
> __
> This email, including attachments, is intended only for the addressee
> and may be confidential, privileged and subject to copyright.  If you
> have received this email in error, please advise the sender and delete
> it.  If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not
> use, copy or disclose its content to anyone.  You must not copy or 
> communicate to others content that is confidential or subject to 
> copyright, unless you have the consent of the content owner.
> 

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

RE: Load balancing for uptime

[Peter Lin]

 
In practice, the load on the DB is the killer right?
 
atleast in my experience, that is the killer unless you use a good database like 
sybase, db2 or oracle. my .2 cents.
 
peter lin


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My humble 2p worth...

In your rebuild, perhaps you might consider avoiding the built-in session
vars altogether. After getting caught with them in ASP a few years ago I
vowed to avoid them altogether. My latest JSP app implements pseudo-session
vars via a few classes and a db table, which takes the JSP session ID as the
primary key and uses a memo field to store a semi-colon separated list of
"session" values. 

The advantages are:

1. Control: it's all my own code - any bugs/memory leaks are all my own ;-)
2. Scalability: sessions can use any server in the cluster as they all
reference the same db, and the JSessionID is kept in a cookie at the
browser.
3. Resilience: sessions persist as long as the user keeps the browser open,
and even survive a server re-boot.

The downsides:

1. Load: more calls to the db could produce a performance bottleneck on
heavily-loaded systems.

HTH

David

---
David Landy, IT Consultant, Business Intelligence
Somerfield/KwikSave Support Centre
Whitchurch, Bristol, UK. Tel: 0117 301 8977
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   
 
"...Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is
that we are powerful beyond measure." - From A RETURN TO LOVE by
Marianne Williamson © 1992 



If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please preserve the
confidentiality of it and advise the sender immediately of any error in
transmission. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken, or
omitted to be taken, by an unauthorised recipient in reliance upon the
contents of this e-mail is prohibited. Somerfield cannot accept liability
for any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses so
please carry out your own virus checks before opening an attachment. In
replying to this e-mail you are granting the right for that reply to be
forwarded to any other individual within the business and also to be read by
others. Any views expressed by an individual within this message do not
necessarily reflect the views of Somerfield. Somerfield reserves the right
to intercept, monitor and record communications for lawful business
purposes.

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

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam

RE: Load balancing for uptime

[david . landy]

My humble 2p worth...

In your rebuild, perhaps you might consider avoiding the built-in session
vars altogether. After getting caught with them in ASP a few years ago I
vowed to avoid them altogether. My latest JSP app implements pseudo-session
vars via a few classes and a db table, which takes the JSP session ID as the
primary key and uses a memo field to store a semi-colon separated list of
"session" values. 

The advantages are:

1. Control: it's all my own code - any bugs/memory leaks are all my own ;-)
2. Scalability: sessions can use any server in the cluster as they all
reference the same db, and the JSessionID is kept in a cookie at the
browser.
3. Resilience: sessions persist as long as the user keeps the browser open,
and even survive a server re-boot.

The downsides:

1. Load: more calls to the db could produce a performance bottleneck on
heavily-loaded systems.

HTH

David

---
David Landy, IT Consultant, Business Intelligence
Somerfield/KwikSave Support Centre
Whitchurch, Bristol, UK. Tel: 0117 301 8977
[EMAIL PROTECTED]     
 
"...Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is
that we are powerful beyond measure." - From A RETURN TO LOVE by
Marianne Williamson © 1992  


 
If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, please preserve the
confidentiality of it and advise the sender immediately of any error in
transmission. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken, or
omitted to be taken, by an unauthorised recipient in reliance upon the
contents of this e-mail is prohibited. Somerfield cannot accept liability
for any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses so
please carry out your own virus checks before opening an attachment. In
replying to this e-mail you are granting the right for that reply to be
forwarded to any other individual within the business and also to be read by
others. Any views expressed by an individual within this message do not
necessarily reflect the views of Somerfield.  Somerfield reserves the right
to intercept, monitor and record communications for lawful business
purposes.

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

Re: Load balancing for uptime

[Antonio Fiol Bonnín]

Hi,

To keep it up, you will need to setup session replication (See your 
Cluster element in server.xml), either in-memory or JDBC. Both are 
supposed to work.

However, that implies several things:
- Your session must contain Seralizable objects only.
- Your performance will be worse (how much worse highly depends on the 
size of the objects in your session)

And... nobody guarantees that your memory leak (if there is one) is not 
related to the information stored in sessions.

Depending on your load balancer, there is another option (IMHO, better 
for your case).

There are some load balancers that allow you to turn a server down while 
keeping it up for currently established sessions, for a certain time. 
That allows you NOT to use session replication, thus not replicating any 
instability related to sessions.

Oh, and last, if you need a good consultant for fixing, optimizing or 
redesigning your application, you just found one ;-)

Yours,

Antonio Fiol

Derek Clarkson wrote:

Hi all,
	We have an app written in a mix of JSP, servlets and struts across 3
instances of apache, tomcat and an RMI server. To say that it's a pile of
smelly stuff is an understatement, however it works (mostly) and our
customers depend on it. At least once a week though it crashes with out of
memory errors. 

Until we can redesign and fix it we are looking for a way to keep it up. One
suggest has been to have two servers running with a common DB server, and to
use a load balancer to allow us to keep one server up whilst we boot the
other, then vice versa. Thus on a daily basis we can reboot both machines
whilst mainting a working system for the users. 

Can anyone see any problems with this ? I'm concerned about issue realed to
session management, etc.
Ciao
Derek
__
This email, including attachments, is intended only for the addressee
and may be confidential, privileged and subject to copyright.  If you
have received this email in error, please advise the sender and delete
it.  If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not
use, copy or disclose its content to anyone.  You must not copy or 
communicate to others content that is confidential or subject to 
copyright, unless you have the consent of the content owner.
 




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Load balancing for uptime

[David Rees]

Derek Clarkson wrote, On 3/15/2004 10:32 PM:
We have an app written in a mix of JSP, servlets and struts across 3
instances of apache, tomcat and an RMI server. To say that it's a pile of
smelly stuff is an understatement, however it works (mostly) and our
customers depend on it. At least once a week though it crashes with out of
memory errors. 

Until we can redesign and fix it we are looking for a way to keep it up. One
suggest has been to have two servers running with a common DB server, and to
use a load balancer to allow us to keep one server up whilst we boot the
other, then vice versa. Thus on a daily basis we can reboot both machines
whilst mainting a working system for the users. 

Can anyone see any problems with this ? I'm concerned about issue realed to
session management, etc.
I've had good luck using Apache and mod_jk configured with sticky 
sessions used to load-balance across multiple Tomcats.  Works great. 
With Tomcat 5.0 you can do session replication so that you can even lose 
a Tomcat instance without missing a beat.

-Dave

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

RE: load balancing with apache2

[shyam]

Hi,
I have apache running under the local system account. It has the
workers2.properties in the conf directory. I also have the ssl set up
and apache 2 can access them. The balancing.conf is located at apache
serverRoot/conf/ . 

Software Engineer
Adamshand Inc
www.interviewexchange.com


-Original Message-
From: Aadi Deshpande [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 12:49 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: load balancing with apache2

Hi,
Looks like a permissions issue.

Is Apache running as nobody? Does it have rights to 
/conf/balancing.conf? ( which seems to located from the root directory 
of your server ).



shyam wrote:

>Hi All,
>Can somebody help me with this. I am struck . thanks a lot 
>From: shyam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:28 AM
>To: 'Tomcat Users List'
>Subject: load balancing with apache2
>
>Hi All,
>I have set up the clustering with tomcat 5 and it works awesome. I
>followed the steps provided in the documentation for apache load
>balancing. I had success the first time but after that I keep getting
>this error in my apache logs 
>The system cannot find the path specified.  : mod_rewrite: can't access
>text RewriteMap file /conf/balancing.conf
>
>I have the balancing.conf in the conf directory. 
>Balancing.conf
>LB1  tomcat1:8080
>LB3  tomcat2:8080
>ALL  tomcat1:8080|tomcat2:8080
>
>Can you please tell me whats wrong with the above. 
>
>Thanks I advance
>shyam
>
>
>
>
>
>-
>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]




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

Re: load balancing with apache2

[Aadi Deshpande]

Hi,
Looks like a permissions issue.
Is Apache running as nobody? Does it have rights to 
/conf/balancing.conf? ( which seems to located from the root directory 
of your server ).



shyam wrote:

Hi All,
Can somebody help me with this. I am struck . thanks a lot 
From: shyam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:28 AM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: load balancing with apache2

Hi All,
I have set up the clustering with tomcat 5 and it works awesome. I
followed the steps provided in the documentation for apache load
balancing. I had success the first time but after that I keep getting
this error in my apache logs 
The system cannot find the path specified.  : mod_rewrite: can't access
text RewriteMap file /conf/balancing.conf

I have the balancing.conf in the conf directory. 
Balancing.conf
LB1  tomcat1:8080
LB3  tomcat2:8080
ALL  tomcat1:8080|tomcat2:8080

Can you please tell me whats wrong with the above. 

Thanks I advance
shyam




-
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]

RE: Load Balancing Problem...Urgent

[Shapira, Yoav]

Howdy,
Before you do this, see if the balancer webapp that ships with tomcat5
suits your needs.  The KISS principle...

Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics


>-Original Message-
>From: David Rees [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 4:52 AM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: Re: Load Balancing Problem...Urgent
>
>Kok Wei, Koh wrote, On 2/1/2004 1:33 AM:
>>
>> Why not go with the latest:-
>> * apache 1.3.29
>
>I would recommend Apache 2.0.48 myself as it has the mod_deflate module
>which enables gzip compression and can save a LOT of bandwidth as well.
>  I've been using Apache 2 along with mod_jk and load-balanced Tomcats
>with no problems.
>
>-Dave
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and 
may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged.  This 
e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be 
saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else.  If you are not the(an) 
intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system 
and notify the sender.  Thank you.


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

Re: Load Balancing Problem...Urgent

[David Rees]

Kok Wei, Koh wrote, On 2/1/2004 1:33 AM:
Why not go with the latest:-
* apache 1.3.29
I would recommend Apache 2.0.48 myself as it has the mod_deflate module 
which enables gzip compression and can save a LOT of bandwidth as well. 
 I've been using Apache 2 along with mod_jk and load-balanced Tomcats 
with no problems.

-Dave

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

Re: Load Balancing Problem...Urgent

[Kok Wei, Koh]

Hi Nicholas,

It is great to see undergraduates students (especially from Malaysia), 
using Tomcat in their projects ;-) High five dude!

Ok first of all, if you're building a web application you may want to 
consider placing Apache 1.3.x in front of your Tomcat instance, to serve 
a all static contents such as html/images and proxy all tomcat related 
stuffs to the Tomcat instances.

Why not go with the latest:-
* apache 1.3.29
* tomcat 4.1.29
* and the mod_jk connector
You may find a very good tutorial on how to setup load balanced Tomcat 
servers at the following URL:-

http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat/index.html

To answer your question...


how can I send the request from load balancer connector to the connector
in that selected server?
After the selected server has finished the process, how can the server 
send back the response to load balancer and then the load balancer sends 
back to user?


An example of a complete flow of a request to a web application eg: 
http://www.xxx.com/myapp/start.do is ...

User -> Apache -> Tomcat -> Apache -> User

The way Apache determines if a particular request is to be proxied to 
Tomcar, is via the JkMount directive in the httpd.conf, see below:

JkMount /myapp/* loadbalancer

where "loadbalancer" is a worker of type "lb".

Please go through the above URL to find out more.
Good luck!
Nicholas Tham Soon Hing wrote:
Hi,

I'm an undergraduate student from Malaysia. I'm using Tomcat 4.1.27 to
do a load balancing system. This system consists of several tomcat
servers and one of them will be the load balancer. When a user accesses
a url page, the load balancer will select a server to response to that
request. The problem that I faced now is I don't know how to make the
selected server to process the request from user browser. As I know the
tomcat connector will assign the socket to processor to process it. So
how can I send the request from load balancer connector to the connector
in that selected server? What should I send (socket? Input stream? Or
the request line? How to get these?)?After the selected server has
finished the process, how can the server send back the response to load
balancer and then the load balancer sends back to user? Can anyone help
me on this? Or is there any one has done this before? Can someone show
me the sample code for solving this problem? It's urgent. Your help is
appreciated.
Thanks,
Nicholas Tham


-
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: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

[David Rees]

On Tue, November 11, 2003 1at 1:52 am, Dean Searle wrote:
>
> Reading through it looks like I would need the assistance  of Apache
> anyways, or can I have an instance of Tomcat listening on port 80 and do
> the load balancing?

As Yoav hinted, you can use any type of load balancer in front of Tomcat. 
But Tomcat itself doesn't have load balancing capabilities built in so you
will need to find something else to balance requests as desired between
instances of Tomcat.

-Dave

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

RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

[Dean Searle]

Again thank you, I'll take some time and read this and if I have any questions I'll 
make a new posting here.

Thanks,

Dean


-Original Message-
From:   Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:   Tue 11/11/2003 14:58
To: Tomcat Users List
Cc: 
Subject:    RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

Howdy,
You don't have to have Apache in front.  Any load-balancer will do.  Let
me redirect you to the tomcat 5 clustering page, as it's more recent,
and I think easier to follow:
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.0-doc/cluster-howto.html

Tomcat 5's clustering support is more built-in than tomcat 4's.  Filip
and others will answer questions if you actually set up an environment
and run into problems.

Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics


>-Original Message-
>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:53 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>
>Thank you very much, Yoav.
>
>Reading through it looks like I would need the assistance  of Apache
>anyways, or can I have an instance of Tomcat listening on port 80 and
do
>the load balancing?
>
>Dean
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From:  Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent:  Tue 11/11/2003 14:44
>To:Tomcat Users List
>Cc:
>Subject:   RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>
>Howdy,
>Yes, you can do with tomcat standalone.  See
>http://www.filip.net/tomcat/tomcat-javagroups.html
>
>Yoav Shapira
>Millennium ChemInformatics
>
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:43 PM
>>To: Tomcat Users List
>>Subject: RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>>
>>I knew you could do that with apache and tomcat, but I'm looking at
>only
>>Tomcat itself and nothing else.
>>
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Asif Chowdhary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tue 11/11/2003 14:37
>>To:   Tomcat Users List
>>Cc:
>>Subject:  RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>>Yes you can cluster and load balance tomcat using mod-jk2 Connector
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:27 PM
>>To: Tomcat Users List
>>Subject: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>>
>>
>>I have searched around to find this and have found nothing, but is it
>>possible to load balance a complete standalone Tomcat server or
cluster
>>standalone Tomcat's doing HTTP and Application requests?
>>
>>Thank you everyone in advance
>>
>>Dean
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business
>communication, and may contain information that is confidential,
>proprietary and/or privileged.  This e-mail is intended only for the
>individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be saved, copied,
>printed, disclosed or used by anyone else.  If you are not the(an)
intended
>recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer
system
>and notify the sender.  Thank you.
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>




This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and 
may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged.  This 
e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be 
saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else.  If you are not the(an) 
intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system 
and notify the sender.  Thank you.


-
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: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

[Shapira, Yoav]

Howdy,
You don't have to have Apache in front.  Any load-balancer will do.  Let
me redirect you to the tomcat 5 clustering page, as it's more recent,
and I think easier to follow:
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.0-doc/cluster-howto.html

Tomcat 5's clustering support is more built-in than tomcat 4's.  Filip
and others will answer questions if you actually set up an environment
and run into problems.

Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics


>-Original Message-
>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:53 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>
>Thank you very much, Yoav.
>
>Reading through it looks like I would need the assistance  of Apache
>anyways, or can I have an instance of Tomcat listening on port 80 and
do
>the load balancing?
>
>Dean
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From:  Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent:  Tue 11/11/2003 14:44
>To:Tomcat Users List
>Cc:
>Subject:   RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>
>Howdy,
>Yes, you can do with tomcat standalone.  See
>http://www.filip.net/tomcat/tomcat-javagroups.html
>
>Yoav Shapira
>Millennium ChemInformatics
>
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:43 PM
>>To: Tomcat Users List
>>Subject: RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>>
>>I knew you could do that with apache and tomcat, but I'm looking at
>only
>>Tomcat itself and nothing else.
>>
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Asif Chowdhary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tue 11/11/2003 14:37
>>To:   Tomcat Users List
>>Cc:
>>Subject:  RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>>Yes you can cluster and load balance tomcat using mod-jk2 Connector
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:27 PM
>>To: Tomcat Users List
>>Subject: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>>
>>
>>I have searched around to find this and have found nothing, but is it
>>possible to load balance a complete standalone Tomcat server or
cluster
>>standalone Tomcat's doing HTTP and Application requests?
>>
>>Thank you everyone in advance
>>
>>Dean
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business
>communication, and may contain information that is confidential,
>proprietary and/or privileged.  This e-mail is intended only for the
>individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be saved, copied,
>printed, disclosed or used by anyone else.  If you are not the(an)
intended
>recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer
system
>and notify the sender.  Thank you.
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>




This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and 
may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged.  This 
e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be 
saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else.  If you are not the(an) 
intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system 
and notify the sender.  Thank you.


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

RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

[Dean Searle]

Thank you very much, Yoav.

Reading through it looks like I would need the assistance  of Apache anyways, or can I 
have an instance of Tomcat listening on port 80 and do the load balancing?

Dean


-Original Message-
From:   Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:   Tue 11/11/2003 14:44
To: Tomcat Users List
Cc: 
Subject:RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

Howdy,
Yes, you can do with tomcat standalone.  See
http://www.filip.net/tomcat/tomcat-javagroups.html

Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics


>-Original Message-
>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:43 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>
>I knew you could do that with apache and tomcat, but I'm looking at
only
>Tomcat itself and nothing else.
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From:  Asif Chowdhary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent:  Tue 11/11/2003 14:37
>To:Tomcat Users List
>Cc:
>Subject:   RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>Yes you can cluster and load balance tomcat using mod-jk2 Connector
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:27 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>
>
>I have searched around to find this and have found nothing, but is it
>possible to load balance a complete standalone Tomcat server or cluster
>standalone Tomcat's doing HTTP and Application requests?
>
>Thank you everyone in advance
>
>Dean
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>




This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and 
may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged.  This 
e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be 
saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else.  If you are not the(an) 
intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system 
and notify the sender.  Thank you.


-
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: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

[Shapira, Yoav]

Howdy,
Yes, you can do with tomcat standalone.  See
http://www.filip.net/tomcat/tomcat-javagroups.html

Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics


>-Original Message-
>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:43 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>
>I knew you could do that with apache and tomcat, but I'm looking at
only
>Tomcat itself and nothing else.
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From:  Asif Chowdhary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent:  Tue 11/11/2003 14:37
>To:Tomcat Users List
>Cc:
>Subject:   RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>Yes you can cluster and load balance tomcat using mod-jk2 Connector
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:27 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
>
>
>I have searched around to find this and have found nothing, but is it
>possible to load balance a complete standalone Tomcat server or cluster
>standalone Tomcat's doing HTTP and Application requests?
>
>Thank you everyone in advance
>
>Dean
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>




This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, and 
may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged.  This 
e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may not be 
saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else.  If you are not the(an) 
intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer system 
and notify the sender.  Thank you.


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

RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

[Dean Searle]

I knew you could do that with apache and tomcat, but I'm looking at only Tomcat itself 
and nothing else.


-Original Message-
From:   Asif Chowdhary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:   Tue 11/11/2003 14:37
To: Tomcat Users List
Cc: 
Subject:        RE: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1
Yes you can cluster and load balance tomcat using mod-jk2 Connector

-Original Message-
From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:27 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1


I have searched around to find this and have found nothing, but is it possible to load 
balance a complete standalone Tomcat server or cluster standalone Tomcat's doing HTTP 
and Application requests?

Thank you everyone in advance

Dean






-
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: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1

[Asif Chowdhary]

Yes you can cluster and load balance tomcat using mod-jk2 Connector

-Original Message-
From: Dean Searle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 2:27 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Load balancing a standalone Tomcat 4.1


I have searched around to find this and have found nothing, but is it possible to load 
balance a complete standalone Tomcat server or cluster standalone Tomcat's doing HTTP 
and Application requests?

Thank you everyone in advance

Dean






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

Re: Load balancing with 2xTC5, 1xIIS and jk2

[Mats Andersson]

Thank you for your answer. The configuration file below works for jk, 
but I want to use jk2 because it
does not cause exceptions to be thrown at startup and it does not hang 
tomcat during shutdown in later
tomcat releases (has something to do with Managed beans).

I have found some information about jk2 configuration that may solve my 
problem. I will post a sample workers2.properties
here if it works. I think there is a default load balancer named lb:0 
that is used if no load balancer is defined.

Mats

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Hi here is a sample workers.properties that you can use.

worker.list=tomcat0, tomcat1, loadbalancer
worker.tomcat0.type=ajp13
worker.tomcat0.host=localhost
worker.tomcat0.port=8009
worker.tomcat0.cachesize=100
worker.tomcat0.lbfactor=100
worker.tomcat1.type=ajp13
worker.tomcat1.host=localhost
worker.tomcat1.port=8011
worker.tomcat1.cachesize=100
worker.tomcat1.lbfactor=100
worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=tomcat0,tomcat1
Save the file in the directory .../apache/conf

Then add following lines to httpd.conf
LoadModule jk_module libexec/mod_jk.so
AddModule mod_jk.c

  JkWorkersFile .../apache/conf/workers.properties
  JkLogFile .../apache/logs/mod_jk.log
  JkLogLevel warn
  JkMount /servlet/* loadbalancer
  JkMount /*.jsp loadbalancer

Do not forget to put mod_jk.so in directory .../apache/libexec

:-)
AB


|-+--->
| |   Mats Andersson  |
| | |
| |   |
| |   09/15/03 01:40  |
| |   PM  |
| |   Please respond  |
| |   to "Tomcat Users|
| |   List"   |
| |   |
|-+--->
 
>---|
 | 
  |
 |To:  Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
 |
 |cc:  
  |
 |Subject: Load balancing with 2xTC5, 1xIIS and jk2
  |
 
>---|


How do I define two workers for load balancing in workers2.properties?
There is
an example for the old jk, but I can't find any for jk2.
Thanks in advance!
Mats
-
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]

Re: Load balancing with 2xTC5, 1xIIS and jk2

[Ashish-Kumar . Balyan]

Hi,

My reply was for load balancing with Apache
What I mean is that there should be something similar for IIS.

Regards
AB


|-+--->
| |   Mats Andersson  |
| | |
| |   |
| |   09/15/03 01:40  |
| |   PM  |
| |   Please respond  |
| |   to "Tomcat Users|
| |   List"   |
| |   |
|-+--->
  
>---|
  |
   |
  |To:  Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
  |
  |cc: 
   |
  |Subject: Load balancing with 2xTC5, 1xIIS and jk2   
   |
  
>---|




How do I define two workers for load balancing in workers2.properties?
There is
an example for the old jk, but I can't find any for jk2.

Thanks in advance!
Mats


-
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: Load balancing with 2xTC5, 1xIIS and jk2

[Ashish-Kumar . Balyan]

Hi here is a sample workers.properties that you can use.


worker.list=tomcat0, tomcat1, loadbalancer
worker.tomcat0.type=ajp13
worker.tomcat0.host=localhost
worker.tomcat0.port=8009
worker.tomcat0.cachesize=100
worker.tomcat0.lbfactor=100
worker.tomcat1.type=ajp13
worker.tomcat1.host=localhost
worker.tomcat1.port=8011
worker.tomcat1.cachesize=100
worker.tomcat1.lbfactor=100
worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=tomcat0,tomcat1

Save the file in the directory .../apache/conf


Then add following lines to httpd.conf
LoadModule jk_module libexec/mod_jk.so
AddModule mod_jk.c

   JkWorkersFile .../apache/conf/workers.properties
   JkLogFile .../apache/logs/mod_jk.log
   JkLogLevel warn
   JkMount /servlet/* loadbalancer
   JkMount /*.jsp loadbalancer



Do not forget to put mod_jk.so in directory .../apache/libexec


:-)
AB



|-+--->
| |   Mats Andersson  |
| | |
| |   |
| |   09/15/03 01:40  |
| |   PM  |
| |   Please respond  |
| |   to "Tomcat Users|
| |   List"   |
| |   |
|-+--->
  
>---|
  |
   |
  |To:  Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
  |
  |cc: 
   |
  |Subject: Load balancing with 2xTC5, 1xIIS and jk2   
   |
  
>---|




How do I define two workers for load balancing in workers2.properties?
There is
an example for the old jk, but I can't find any for jk2.

Thanks in advance!
Mats


-
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: Load balancing with 2xTC5, 1xIIS and jk2

[Mats Andersson]

Thanks for your reply, but I need something more specific. I don't think 
the syntax of the workers.properties
is the same as in workers2.properties, so I would like to know _how_ to 
define the load balancer.
Does anyone have an example workers2.properties file?

Thanks!

Mats

jerome moliere wrote:

Mats Andersson wrote:

How do I define two workers for load balancing in 
workers2.properties? There is
an example for the old jk, but I can't find any for jk2.


Hi mats,
i'm sure that the idea is the same
define 1 worker for your first TC5
 1 worker for the second TC5
 1 worker as the load balancer
 then you can define weights for respecting differences of 
power for the 2 machines...

HTH

Jerome



-
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: Load balancing with 2xTC5, 1xIIS and jk2

[jerome moliere]

Mats Andersson wrote:

How do I define two workers for load balancing in workers2.properties? 
There is
an example for the old jk, but I can't find any for jk2.
Hi mats,
i'm sure that the idea is the same
define 1 worker for your first TC5
 1 worker for the second TC5
 1 worker as the load balancer
 then you can define weights for respecting differences of 
power for the 2 machines...

HTH

Jerome



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

Re: Load Balancing with MOD_JK and MOD_JK2 on windows.

[Joe Harmon]

That fixed it thanks

Joe Harmon
Web Services Support 
Novell Inc.  -  The leading provider of Information Solutions.
(801) 861-9163
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9/11/2003 7:09:05 AM >>>
Joe Harmon wrote:

> Please, please, please, can someone help.
> 
> MOd_JK2 issue:  If I am using mod_jk2.dll (tried several builds) I
get
> the round robin to function, but not the stick sessions.  All three
> instances of Tomcat are running on the same box using the same files
> with different ports. Here is the configuration.
> 
> 
> 
> ## This is for the first Tomcat instance ##  uses SERVER.XML
> [channel.socket:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009] 
> port=9009
> host=127.0.0.1 

Change the names to remove dots everywhere, i.e. use:
[channel.socket:lab49:9009]
port=9009
host=127.0.0.1

mod_jk2 daes not support dots in names. it is a known bug for a long
time.

> 
> ## This is for the second Tomcat instance ##  uses SERVER2.XML
> [channel.socket:lab49.provo.novell.com:9019] 
> port=9019
> host=127.0.0.1 
> 
> ## This is for the third Tomcat instance ## uses SERVER3.XML
> [channel.socket:lab49.provo.novell.com:9029] 
> port=9029
> host=127.0.0.1 
> 
> ## This is defining the worker over the AJP13 protocol. This will
need
> to be done for each instance. ##
> [ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009]
> [ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9019]
> [ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9029]
> 
> [lb:lb]
> worker=ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009
> worker=ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9019
> worker=ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9029
> #tickySession=1
> 
> [shm:]
> info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status with
> multiprocess servers
> file=c:/apache/Apache2/conf/xx/jk2.shm
> size=100
> debug=0
> disabled=0
> 
> [uri:/examples/*]
> worker=lb:lb
> worker=ajp13:localhost9009
> 
> [status:status]
> 
> [uri:/jkstatus/*]
> worker=status:status
> 
> [uri:/admin/*]
> worker=ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009
> 
> [uri:/nps/*] 
> group=lb
> stickySession=1
> ###End of workers2.properties## 
> 
> Joe Harmon
> Web Services Support 
> Novell Inc.  -  The leading provider of Information Solutions.
> (801) 861-9163
> [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] 


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

Re: Load Balancing with MOD_JK and MOD_JK2 on windows.

[Vladyslav Kosulin]

Vladyslav Kosulin wrote:

Joe Harmon wrote:

Please, please, please, can someone help.

MOd_JK2 issue:  If I am using mod_jk2.dll (tried several builds) I get
the round robin to function, but not the stick sessions.  All three
instances of Tomcat are running on the same box using the same files
with different ports. Here is the configuration.


## This is for the first Tomcat instance ##  uses SERVER.XML
[channel.socket:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009] port=9009
host=127.0.0.1 


Change the names to remove dots everywhere, i.e. use:
[channel.socket:lab49:9009]
port=9009
host=127.0.0.1
mod_jk2 daes not support dots in names. it is a known bug for a long time.
I meant, mod_jk2 support for sticky sessions is broken for names with dots. it 
can not correctly identify the target host if the JSESSIONID is in form of 
xxx.hostname.domainname. It can handle only xxx.hostname

Vlad

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

Re: Load Balancing with MOD_JK and MOD_JK2 on windows.

[Vladyslav Kosulin]

Joe Harmon wrote:

Please, please, please, can someone help.

MOd_JK2 issue:  If I am using mod_jk2.dll (tried several builds) I get
the round robin to function, but not the stick sessions.  All three
instances of Tomcat are running on the same box using the same files
with different ports. Here is the configuration.


## This is for the first Tomcat instance ##  uses SERVER.XML
[channel.socket:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009] 
port=9009
host=127.0.0.1 
Change the names to remove dots everywhere, i.e. use:
[channel.socket:lab49:9009]
port=9009
host=127.0.0.1
mod_jk2 daes not support dots in names. it is a known bug for a long time.

## This is for the second Tomcat instance ##  uses SERVER2.XML
[channel.socket:lab49.provo.novell.com:9019] 
port=9019
host=127.0.0.1 

## This is for the third Tomcat instance ## uses SERVER3.XML
[channel.socket:lab49.provo.novell.com:9029] 
port=9029
host=127.0.0.1 

## This is defining the worker over the AJP13 protocol. This will need
to be done for each instance. ##
[ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009]
[ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9019]
[ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9029]
[lb:lb]
worker=ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009
worker=ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9019
worker=ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9029
#tickySession=1
[shm:]
info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status with
multiprocess servers
file=c:/apache/Apache2/conf/xx/jk2.shm
size=100
debug=0
disabled=0
[uri:/examples/*]
worker=lb:lb
worker=ajp13:localhost9009
[status:status]

[uri:/jkstatus/*]
worker=status:status
[uri:/admin/*]
worker=ajp13:lab49.provo.novell.com:9009
[uri:/nps/*] 
group=lb
stickySession=1
###End of workers2.properties## 

Joe Harmon
Web Services Support 
Novell Inc.  -  The leading provider of Information Solutions.
(801) 861-9163
[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]

RE: Load balancing

[Ben Ricker]

On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 09:52, Roberts, Eric wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Can you use the jvmRoute parameter?

The above might work; I have not tried it.

One thing I did was to turn on the Tomcat web listener and then I can
directly access each Tomcat instance by port (Tomcat1 on Server 1 is
port 8081 and Tomcat2 on Server2 is port 8082, etc).

Ben Ricker
Wellinx.com

> -Original Message-
> From: Pierre Maris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 20 June 2003 16:38
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> I am working with a load balanced configuration (1 Apache and 2 Tomcat instances on 
> the same machine). Load balancing is provided by mod_jk.
> 
>  
> 
> My application uses caches, and to purge caches I need to address, explicitly,  each 
> of  the Tomcat instances.
> 
>  
> 
> What's the best way to do this?
> 
>  
> 
> Regards
> 
>  
> 
>   Pierre
> 
> -
> 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: Load balancing

[Roberts, Eric]

Hi,

Can you use the jvmRoute parameter?

-Original Message-
From: Pierre Maris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 20 June 2003 16:38
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Load balancing


Hi,

 

I am working with a load balanced configuration (1 Apache and 2 Tomcat instances on 
the same machine). Load balancing is provided by mod_jk.

 

My application uses caches, and to purge caches I need to address, explicitly,  each 
of  the Tomcat instances.

 

What's the best way to do this?

 

Regards

 

  Pierre

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

RE: Load Balancing Question?

[Michael Cardon]

Solved: I added the following to each of my tomcat server.xml files in the
 tag:

mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 11:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Load Balancing Question?


I would like to setup a 'session' type of load balancing using apache2 and
two or three instances of tomcat41.

This setup routes each request to a different tomcat instance.  In mywebapp,
once a person has logged in, I need each additional request in that users
session to stay with the same tomcat instance.  When another person's
request comes in then it would then route to the second instance of tomcat
and they would remain with that instance as long as their session is valid.
Does this make sense to anyone???

I'm not quit sure if I need to setup, or how to setup, any virtual servers
in apache2.

Just for a little background, this is what I'm working with:

RH Linux 8.0
apache2-2.0.45-1.7.2.i386.rpm
apache2-devel-2.0.45-1.7.2.i386.rpm
apache2-manual-2.0.45-1.7.2.i386.rpm
mod_jk2-ap20-2.0.1-1jpp.i386.rpm
j2sdk-1_4_1_03-linux-i586-rpm.bin
tomcat-4.1.24-LE-jdk14.tar.gz


I have installed two instances of tomcat on the same machine with apache2.
The third tomcat instace with be on a different machine. (I'm just dealing
with the first two right now)

/usr/local/sites/tom1/tomcat --> using CoyoteConnector on port 8009
/usr/local/sites/tom2/tomcat --> using CoyoteConnector on port 8019


In the workers2.properties file I have set the following:

[logger]
level=DEBUG

[config:]
file=/etc/httpd2/conf/workers2.properties
debug=0
debugEnv=0

[uriMap:]
info=Maps the requests. Options: debug
debug=0

# Alternate file logger
[logger.file:0]
level=DEBUG
file=/var/log/httpd2/jk2.log

[shm:]
info=Scoreboard. Required for reconfiguration and status with multiprocess
servers
file=/var/run/jk2.shm
size=100
debug=0
disabled=0

[workerEnv:]
info=Global server options
timing=1
debug=0
# Default Native Logger (apache2 or win32 )
# can be overriden to a file logger, useful
# when tracing win32 related issues
#logger=logger.file:0

[lb:lb]
info=Default load balancer.
debug=0

[channel.socket:localhost:8009]
info=Ajp13 forwarding over socket
debug=0
tomcatId=localhost:8009
lb_factor=1
group=lb
disabled=0

[channel.socket:localhost:8019]
info=A second tomcat instance.
debug=0
tomcatId=localhost:8019
lb_factor=1
group=lb
disabled=0

[status:]
info=Status worker, displays runtime informations

[uri:/jkstatus/*]
info=Display status information and checks the config file for changes.
group=status:

[uri:/mywebapp]
info=Example webapp in the default context.
context=/legacy
debug=0

[uri:/mywebapp/servlet/*]
info=Prefix mapping

[uri:/mywebapp/*.jsp]
info=Extension mapping

[uri:/mywebapp/*]
info=Map the whole webapp




-
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: Load-balancing not equal amongst 2 Tomcat (using Apache and mod_jk)

[Bill Barker]

I don't have access to a HP-UX box, but at a guess, the HP-UX Apache uses
the pre-fork MPM.  What you are seeing is pretty typical of that case.  At
the very least, you need to be using the worker MPM for this to work at the
moment.

You'll also have to upgrade your version of mod_jk (at the very least).  You
might also want to check out mod_jk2, which IMHO has the best load-balancing
support.

"Duarte Loreto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Hello!
>
> I'm running Apache 2.0.45 with self compiled mod_jk (version
> jakarta-tomcat-connectors-4.0.4). It is supposed to load-balance between
two
> jakarta-tomcat-4.0.4, one on the localhost and another on a remote
machine.
> Both machines are HP-UX 11.00. JDK is 1.3.1 and the Apache is a HP bundle
> (except for the self-compiled mod_jk, as I said).
>
> I require that the server loadbalances requests with sticky session as I
> need the users to remain on the same server throughout their transactions.
>
> The problem I'm having is that instead of having a 50%/50% load
distribution
> amongst the two tomcats (Tomcat1 and Tomcat2), I have a 10%/90%
> distribution. This is causing disruptive behaviour on the tomcat2 server
as
> it does not handle the load on peek hours.
>
> Bellow is a stripped version of my workers.properties (stripped of
comments
> and with the 2nd machine name changed).
>
> Please help me solve this. Request any other information if necessary. By
> the way... Upgrading Tomcat/Connectors is planned just for in 4 months or
> so. It is very burochratic and it takes very long to upgrade anything,
so...
> Upgrading components will not be the best solution, unfortunatly (I had to
> wait 2 months for a Apache upgrade from 2.0.39 to 2.0.45... 2 months and a
> lot of mails and documents).
>
> Many thanks for your attention.
>
> Duarte "HappyGuy" Loreto
>
> "Don't worry, be happy!"
>
>
> workers.tomcat_home=/apps/webapps/jakarta-tomcat-4.0.4
> workers.java_home=/opt/java1.3
> ps=/
> worker.list=tomcat1, tomcat2, loadbalancer
>
> #-- TOMCAT1 WORKER DEFINITION --
> worker.tomcat1.port=8009
> worker.tomcat1.host=localhost
> worker.tomcat1.type=ajp13
> worker.tomcat1.lbfactor=1
> worker.tomcat1.cachesize=300
> worker.tomcat1.cache_timeout=600
> worker.tomcat1.socket_keepalive=0
> worker.tomcat1.socket_timeout=1800
>
> #-- TOMCAT2 WORKER DEFINITION --
> worker.tomcat2.port=9010
> worker.tomcat2.host=theotherservername
> worker.tomcat2.type=ajp13
> worker.tomcat2.lbfactor=1
> worker.tomcat2.cachesize=300
> worker.tomcat2.cache_timeout=600
> worker.tomcat2.socket_keepalive=0
> worker.tomcat2.socket_timeout=1800
>
> #-- DEFAULT LOAD BALANCER WORKER DEFINITION --
> worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
> worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=tomcat1, tomcat2
>
> worker.inprocess.type=jni
>
worker.inprocess.class_path=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)lib$(ps)catalina.jar
> worker.inprocess.lbfactor=1
> worker.inprocess.cachesize=150
> worker.inprocess.cmd_line=start
> worker.inprocess.cmd_line=-config
> worker.inprocess.cmd_line=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)conf$(ps)server.xml
> worker.inprocess.cmd_line=-home
> worker.inprocess.cmd_line=$(workers.tomcat_home)
>
worker.inprocess.jvm_lib=$(workers.java_home)$(ps)jre$(ps)lib$(ps)PA_RISC2.0
$(ps)server$(ps)libjvm.sl
>
worker.inprocess.stdout=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)logs$(ps)inprocess.stdout
>
worker.inprocess.stderr=$(workers.tomcat_home)$(ps)logs$(ps)inprocess.stderr
> worker.inprocess.sysprops=tomcat.home=$(workers.tomcat_home)
>
> _
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail




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

RE: Load balancing and Sticky sessions

[Ralph Einfeldt]

That's not true.

If mod_jk is setup right all requests for the same session 
should go to the same tomcat. So you don't need session 
replication for this.

One typical reason that this might not happen is to ommit the 
jvmRoute="" in the engine element of server.xml.

It's also a good idea to have a look at:

http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat/

> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Ricker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 7:18 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Load balancing and Sticky sessions
> 
> 
> Unless you have session replication going on between the two 
> Tomcats (or> are running Tomcat 5...doubtful since it is in its infant stages), you
> will always lose your session if you get sent from one Tomcat to
> another.
> 

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

RE: Load balancing and Sticky sessions

[Filip Hanik]

yes, if you don't cluster your tomcat servers, don't expect session
replication to work :-),

yes, there are jdk 1.3 version out there, there is one commercial one which
you have to pay for. just make a search on google,

Filip

-Original Message-
From: Kavitha ranga [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 10:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Load balancing and Sticky sessions


I think I did not make my point clear. I have to rephrase my question.
we have Apache 1.3 and 2 tomcats(4.0 ) running on 2 different servers. The 2
servers are on SUN cluster and we have only apache and Oracle as part of the
cluster. Tomcat is not in the cluster. So when a switch takes place between
the 2 tomcats I am losing my sessions.Also we are on jdk1.3. Any suggesions
in highly appreciated.

Thanks for the quick response.
Kavitha





>From: Ben Ricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Load balancing and Sticky sessions
>Date: 20 Mar 2003 12:18:09 -0600
>
>Unless you have session replication going on between the two Tomcats (or
>are running Tomcat 5...doubtful since it is in its infant stages), you
>will always lose your session if you get sent from one Tomcat to
>another.
>
>Ben Ricker
>
>
>On Thu, 2003-03-20 at 12:09, Kavitha ranga wrote:
> > Hello,
> >I have Apache and 2 tomcats running on 2 separate servers which are
>in a
> > cluster. I am running Tomcat 4.0(using ajp13) via mod_jk. I am also
>using
> > load balancing.I am losing my session variables when there is a switch
> > between the 2 tomcats. Any help is greatly appreciated.
> >
> > thanks in advance,
> > Kavitha
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _
> > Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>--
>Ben Ricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Wellinx.com
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


-
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: Load balancing and Sticky sessions

[Kavitha ranga]

I think I did not make my point clear. I have to rephrase my question.
we have Apache 1.3 and 2 tomcats(4.0 ) running on 2 different servers. The 2 
servers are on SUN cluster and we have only apache and Oracle as part of the 
cluster. Tomcat is not in the cluster. So when a switch takes place between 
the 2 tomcats I am losing my sessions.Also we are on jdk1.3. Any suggesions 
in highly appreciated.

Thanks for the quick response.
Kavitha




From: Ben Ricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Load balancing and Sticky sessions
Date: 20 Mar 2003 12:18:09 -0600
Unless you have session replication going on between the two Tomcats (or
are running Tomcat 5...doubtful since it is in its infant stages), you
will always lose your session if you get sent from one Tomcat to
another.
Ben Ricker

On Thu, 2003-03-20 at 12:09, Kavitha ranga wrote:
> Hello,
>I have Apache and 2 tomcats running on 2 separate servers which are 
in a
> cluster. I am running Tomcat 4.0(using ajp13) via mod_jk. I am also 
using
> load balancing.I am losing my session variables when there is a switch
> between the 2 tomcats. Any help is greatly appreciated.
>
> thanks in advance,
> Kavitha
>
>
>
>
>
> _
> Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Ben Ricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Wellinx.com

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


_
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

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

RE: Load balancing and Sticky sessions

[Filip Hanik]

Hi Ben,
session replication is working for Tomcat 5, and I have back ported a
version to tomcat 4.1.x
http://www.filip.net/tomcat-clustering.html

Filip

-Original Message-
From: Ben Ricker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 10:18 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Load balancing and Sticky sessions


Unless you have session replication going on between the two Tomcats (or
are running Tomcat 5...doubtful since it is in its infant stages), you
will always lose your session if you get sent from one Tomcat to
another.

Ben Ricker


On Thu, 2003-03-20 at 12:09, Kavitha ranga wrote:
> Hello,
>I have Apache and 2 tomcats running on 2 separate servers which are in
a
> cluster. I am running Tomcat 4.0(using ajp13) via mod_jk. I am also using
> load balancing.I am losing my session variables when there is a switch
> between the 2 tomcats. Any help is greatly appreciated.
>
> thanks in advance,
> Kavitha
>
>
>
>
>
> _
> Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Ben Ricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Wellinx.com


-
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: Load balancing and Sticky sessions

[Jackson, Stephen]

Check your settings in workers.properties

#
# The loadbalancer (type lb) worker performs weighted round-robin
# load balancing with sticky sessions.
# Note:
#  > If a worker dies, the load balancer will check its state
#once in a while. Until then all work is redirected to peer
#worker.
worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=tomcat1,tomcat2

#
# END workers.properties
#

-Original Message-
From: Ben Ricker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 1:18 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Load balancing and Sticky sessions


Unless you have session replication going on between the two Tomcats (or
are running Tomcat 5...doubtful since it is in its infant stages), you
will always lose your session if you get sent from one Tomcat to
another.

Ben Ricker


On Thu, 2003-03-20 at 12:09, Kavitha ranga wrote:
> Hello,
>I have Apache and 2 tomcats running on 2 separate servers which are in
a 
> cluster. I am running Tomcat 4.0(using ajp13) via mod_jk. I am also using 
> load balancing.I am losing my session variables when there is a switch 
> between the 2 tomcats. Any help is greatly appreciated.
> 
> thanks in advance,
> Kavitha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*  
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- 
Ben Ricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Wellinx.com


-
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: Load balancing and Sticky sessions

[Ben Ricker]

Unless you have session replication going on between the two Tomcats (or
are running Tomcat 5...doubtful since it is in its infant stages), you
will always lose your session if you get sent from one Tomcat to
another.

Ben Ricker


On Thu, 2003-03-20 at 12:09, Kavitha ranga wrote:
> Hello,
>I have Apache and 2 tomcats running on 2 separate servers which are in a 
> cluster. I am running Tomcat 4.0(using ajp13) via mod_jk. I am also using 
> load balancing.I am losing my session variables when there is a switch 
> between the 2 tomcats. Any help is greatly appreciated.
> 
> thanks in advance,
> Kavitha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*  
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- 
Ben Ricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Wellinx.com


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

RE: Load balancing and Sticky sessions

[Filip Hanik]

Hi Kavita,
what clustering library are you using.
There are several options that we can offer you to do.

1. Try the clustering that is going to ship with Tomcat 4,
http://www.filip.net/tomcat-clustering.html

2. Take out Apache out of the equation to make sure your clustering is
working clustering.
At the end of the page that I mentioned above, there is a Java loadbalancer
for testing (do not use this in production :) that you can use to test out
session replication.

Once you've done that, feel free to send your logs so that we can help you
determine the rest of your problems

Filip

-Original Message-
From: Kavitha ranga [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 10:10 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Load balancing and Sticky sessions


Hello,
   I have Apache and 2 tomcats running on 2 separate servers which are in a
cluster. I am running Tomcat 4.0(using ajp13) via mod_jk. I am also using
load balancing.I am losing my session variables when there is a switch
between the 2 tomcats. Any help is greatly appreciated.

thanks in advance,
Kavitha





_
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


-
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: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or mod_jser ve-- SOLVED

[Abraham Kang]

Hi John,

   My point in putting nothing in the server.xml was that you didn't have
to.  That is what I was trying to explain to everyone.  Tomcat 3.3.1 doesn't
require you to set the jvmroute in the server.xml it load balances for you.
I was hoping to get some insight from one of the developers about this.

Thanks,
Abraham


-Original Message-
From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 10:05 AM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
mod_jser ve -- SOLVED



My point was that the load balancing is done with mod_jk and
workers.properties, not Tomcat.  For example, there's nothing in your post
having to do with server.xml.  If you uncovered something different that
needed to be done to server.xml for 3.3 over 4.x, please let us know so that
others can benefit in addition to the info already posted pertaining to
httpd.conf and workers.properties.

John


> -Original Message-
> From: Abraham Kang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 12:54 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
> mod_jser ve -- SOLVED
>
>
> I already looked at the ubeans site but it does not detail how to load
> balance Tomcat 3.3.
>
> Abraham
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 7:41 PM
> To: 'Tomcat Users List'
> Subject: RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
> mod_jser ve -- SOLVED
>
>
>
> A good HOWTO:  http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat
>
> John
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Abraham Kang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
> mod_jserve --
> SOLVED
>
>
> Ok,  Here is my setup:
>
> Redhat 8
> Apache 2.0.43
> Tomcat 3.3.1 (two instances on same box for testing)
>
> Apache Config:
> 
> //httpd.conf  added the following at end of file
> Include /path/to/your/mod_jk.conf
>
> User userThatOwnsStaticFileDirectories
> Group groupThatOwnsStaticFileDirectories
>
>
>
> #
> //mod_jk.conf
>
> LoadModule jk_module modules/mod_jk.so
>
> #AddModule mod_jk.c
>
> JkWorkersFile "/path/to/your/workers.properties"
> JkLogFile "/path/to/your/mod_jk.log"
>
> JkLogLevel emerg
>
> ### Static files are served by Apache from alternate
> directory Alias
> /webapp/html/ "/home/user/webapp/html/"
>
> 
> Options Indexes FollowSymLinks
> AllowOverride None
> Order allow,deny
> Allow from all
> 
>
> ### Protect the WEB-INF directory
> 
> AllowOverride None
> deny from all
> 
>
> ### Define what Tomcat is responsible for and point it to the
> loadbalancer worker JkMount /admin loadbalancer JkMount /admin/*
> loadbalancer
>
> JkMount /examples loadbalancer
> JkMount /examples/* loadbalancer
>
> JkMount /abc/servlet loadbalancer
> JkMount /abc/servlet/* loadbalancer
>
> JkMount /*.jsp loadbalancer
>
> ##
> ###
> //workers.properties
> ### set you workers.tomcat_home, workers.java_home, adn ps
>
> ### Make sure to list all of the workers this is the key
> worker.list=ajp13_1,ajp13_2,loadbalancer
>
> worker.ajp13_1.port=8008
> worker.ajp13_1.host=54.2.1.55
> worker.ajp13_1.type=ajp13
> worker.ajp13_1.lbfactor=1
> ### Because I am using Apache 2
> worker.ajp13_1.cachesize=10
>
> worker.ajp13_2.port=8009
> worker.ajp13_2.host=54.2.1.56
> worker.ajp13_2.type=ajp13
> worker.ajp13_2.lbfactor=1
> ### Because I am using Apache 2
> worker.ajp13_2.cachesize=10
>
> worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
> worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=ajp13_1,ajp13_2
>
>
>
> ##
> ##
> #
> //server.xml  -- NO CHANGES
> //There workers.list does everything for you.  I don't know
> what replaced
> the  element
>
>
>
>
> Special Thanks to Patrick Lin for helping me solve this.
>
> Hope This Helps Someone,
> Abraham Kang
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 1

RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or mod_jser ve -- SOLVED

[Turner, John]

My point was that the load balancing is done with mod_jk and
workers.properties, not Tomcat.  For example, there's nothing in your post
having to do with server.xml.  If you uncovered something different that
needed to be done to server.xml for 3.3 over 4.x, please let us know so that
others can benefit in addition to the info already posted pertaining to
httpd.conf and workers.properties.

John


> -Original Message-
> From: Abraham Kang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2003 12:54 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
> mod_jser ve -- SOLVED
> 
> 
> I already looked at the ubeans site but it does not detail how to load
> balance Tomcat 3.3.
> 
> Abraham
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 7:41 PM
> To: 'Tomcat Users List'
> Subject: RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
> mod_jser ve -- SOLVED
> 
> 
> 
> A good HOWTO:  http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat
> 
> John
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Abraham Kang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or 
> mod_jserve --
> SOLVED
> 
> 
> Ok,  Here is my setup:
> 
> Redhat 8
> Apache 2.0.43
> Tomcat 3.3.1 (two instances on same box for testing)
> 
> Apache Config: 
> 
> //httpd.conf  added the following at end of file
> Include /path/to/your/mod_jk.conf
> 
> User userThatOwnsStaticFileDirectories
> Group groupThatOwnsStaticFileDirectories
> 
> 
> 
> #
> //mod_jk.conf
> 
> LoadModule jk_module modules/mod_jk.so
> 
> #AddModule mod_jk.c
> 
> JkWorkersFile "/path/to/your/workers.properties"
> JkLogFile "/path/to/your/mod_jk.log"
> 
> JkLogLevel emerg
> 
> ### Static files are served by Apache from alternate 
> directory Alias
> /webapp/html/ "/home/user/webapp/html/"
> 
> 
> Options Indexes FollowSymLinks
> AllowOverride None
> Order allow,deny
> Allow from all
> 
> 
> ### Protect the WEB-INF directory
> 
> AllowOverride None
> deny from all
> 
> 
> ### Define what Tomcat is responsible for and point it to the
> loadbalancer worker JkMount /admin loadbalancer JkMount /admin/*
> loadbalancer
> 
> JkMount /examples loadbalancer
> JkMount /examples/* loadbalancer
> 
> JkMount /abc/servlet loadbalancer
> JkMount /abc/servlet/* loadbalancer
> 
> JkMount /*.jsp loadbalancer
> 
> ##
> ###
> //workers.properties
> ### set you workers.tomcat_home, workers.java_home, adn ps
> 
> ### Make sure to list all of the workers this is the key
> worker.list=ajp13_1,ajp13_2,loadbalancer
> 
> worker.ajp13_1.port=8008
> worker.ajp13_1.host=54.2.1.55
> worker.ajp13_1.type=ajp13
> worker.ajp13_1.lbfactor=1
> ### Because I am using Apache 2
> worker.ajp13_1.cachesize=10
> 
> worker.ajp13_2.port=8009
> worker.ajp13_2.host=54.2.1.56
> worker.ajp13_2.type=ajp13
> worker.ajp13_2.lbfactor=1
> ### Because I am using Apache 2
> worker.ajp13_2.cachesize=10
> 
> worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
> worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=ajp13_1,ajp13_2
> 
> 
> 
> ##
> ##
> #
> //server.xml  -- NO CHANGES
> //There workers.list does everything for you.  I don't know 
> what replaced
> the  element
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Special Thanks to Patrick Lin for helping me solve this.
> 
> Hope This Helps Someone,
> Abraham Kang
> 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002
> 
> 
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 

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

RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or mod_jser ve-- SOLVED

[Abraham Kang]

I already looked at the ubeans site but it does not detail how to load
balance Tomcat 3.3.

Abraham

-Original Message-
From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 7:41 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
mod_jser ve -- SOLVED



A good HOWTO:  http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat

John


-Original Message-
From: Abraham Kang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or mod_jserve --
SOLVED


Ok,  Here is my setup:

Redhat 8
Apache 2.0.43
Tomcat 3.3.1 (two instances on same box for testing)

Apache Config: 
//httpd.conf  added the following at end of file
Include /path/to/your/mod_jk.conf

User userThatOwnsStaticFileDirectories
Group groupThatOwnsStaticFileDirectories



#
//mod_jk.conf

LoadModule jk_module modules/mod_jk.so

#AddModule mod_jk.c

JkWorkersFile "/path/to/your/workers.properties"
JkLogFile "/path/to/your/mod_jk.log"

JkLogLevel emerg

### Static files are served by Apache from alternate directory Alias
/webapp/html/ "/home/user/webapp/html/"


Options Indexes FollowSymLinks
AllowOverride None
Order allow,deny
Allow from all


### Protect the WEB-INF directory

AllowOverride None
deny from all


### Define what Tomcat is responsible for and point it to the
loadbalancer worker JkMount /admin loadbalancer JkMount /admin/*
loadbalancer

JkMount /examples loadbalancer
JkMount /examples/* loadbalancer

JkMount /abc/servlet loadbalancer
JkMount /abc/servlet/* loadbalancer

JkMount /*.jsp loadbalancer

#
//workers.properties
### set you workers.tomcat_home, workers.java_home, adn ps

### Make sure to list all of the workers this is the key
worker.list=ajp13_1,ajp13_2,loadbalancer

worker.ajp13_1.port=8008
worker.ajp13_1.host=54.2.1.55
worker.ajp13_1.type=ajp13
worker.ajp13_1.lbfactor=1
### Because I am using Apache 2
worker.ajp13_1.cachesize=10

worker.ajp13_2.port=8009
worker.ajp13_2.host=54.2.1.56
worker.ajp13_2.type=ajp13
worker.ajp13_2.lbfactor=1
### Because I am using Apache 2
worker.ajp13_2.cachesize=10

worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=ajp13_1,ajp13_2




#
//server.xml  -- NO CHANGES
//There workers.list does everything for you.  I don't know what replaced
the  element




Special Thanks to Patrick Lin for helping me solve this.

Hope This Helps Someone,
Abraham Kang



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

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002


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


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

RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or mod_jserve -- SOLVED

[Turner, John]

A good HOWTO:  http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat

John


-Original Message-
From: Abraham Kang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 10:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or mod_jserve --
SOLVED


Ok,  Here is my setup:

Redhat 8
Apache 2.0.43
Tomcat 3.3.1 (two instances on same box for testing)

Apache Config: 
//httpd.conf  added the following at end of file
Include /path/to/your/mod_jk.conf

User userThatOwnsStaticFileDirectories
Group groupThatOwnsStaticFileDirectories



#
//mod_jk.conf

LoadModule jk_module modules/mod_jk.so

#AddModule mod_jk.c

JkWorkersFile "/path/to/your/workers.properties"
JkLogFile "/path/to/your/mod_jk.log"

JkLogLevel emerg

### Static files are served by Apache from alternate directory Alias
/webapp/html/ "/home/user/webapp/html/"


Options Indexes FollowSymLinks
AllowOverride None
Order allow,deny
Allow from all


### Protect the WEB-INF directory

AllowOverride None
deny from all


### Define what Tomcat is responsible for and point it to the
loadbalancer worker JkMount /admin loadbalancer JkMount /admin/*
loadbalancer

JkMount /examples loadbalancer
JkMount /examples/* loadbalancer

JkMount /abc/servlet loadbalancer
JkMount /abc/servlet/* loadbalancer

JkMount /*.jsp loadbalancer

#
//workers.properties
### set you workers.tomcat_home, workers.java_home, adn ps

### Make sure to list all of the workers this is the key
worker.list=ajp13_1,ajp13_2,loadbalancer

worker.ajp13_1.port=8008
worker.ajp13_1.host=54.2.1.55
worker.ajp13_1.type=ajp13
worker.ajp13_1.lbfactor=1
### Because I am using Apache 2
worker.ajp13_1.cachesize=10

worker.ajp13_2.port=8009
worker.ajp13_2.host=54.2.1.56
worker.ajp13_2.type=ajp13
worker.ajp13_2.lbfactor=1
### Because I am using Apache 2
worker.ajp13_2.cachesize=10

worker.loadbalancer.type=lb
worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=ajp13_1,ajp13_2




#
//server.xml  -- NO CHANGES
//There workers.list does everything for you.  I don't know what replaced
the  element




Special Thanks to Patrick Lin for helping me solve this.

Hope This Helps Someone,
Abraham Kang



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:

For additional commands, e-mail:


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002
 

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 12/25/2002
 

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

RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or mod_jser ve

[Abraham Kang]

Hi John,

   Thanks for your response.  If it is possible it should be in the
documentation.

   Unless it is a secret feature that only privilege individuals know about.
;)

   So has anyone on the list done this.

Regards,
Abraham

-Original Message-
From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 1:26 PM
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
Subject: RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
mod_jser ve



http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat

I haven't seen a resource for doing that with Tomcat 3.3.x, but that doesn't
mean there isn't one or that nobody has done it.

John

> -Original Message-
> From: Abraham Kang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 4:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or
> mod_jserve
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>I have searched through Google Groups and the Tomcat User
> archives but I
> can't find any threads that
> detail the configuration required to get Apache load
> balancing to Tomcat
> 3.3.1 through mod_jk or mod_jserve.
>
>I have found references for how to set up Tomat 4.x and
> 4.1.x to load
> balance using the
>  but this does not exist in
> Tomcat 3.3.1.
>
>I have also found references for how to set up load
> balancing with Tomcat
> 3.2 using
>
>  name="handler"
>
> value="org.apache.tomcat.service.connector.Ajp12ConnectionHandler"/>
>  name="port"
> value="8007"/>
>  name="max_threads"
> value="100"/>
>  name="max_spare_threads"
> value="40"/>
>  name="min_spare_threads"
> value="20" />
>
>
>but I have not found any references to the  element
>in the Tomcat 3.3 server configuration reference.
>
>Can anyone help me with the configuration specifics for Tomcat's
> server.xml for Tomcat 3.3.1.
>
>I also looked at mod_jserver but it can only partition
> load (no load
> balance with sticky sessions)
>based on URL mappings for example:
>   /abc  www.serverone.com
>   /def  www.servertwo.com
>
>I have spent the whole weekend trying to get this working
> and by boss is
> telling me it is possible.
>
> Warmest Regards,
> Abraham
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>

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


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

RE: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or mod_jserve

[Turner, John]

http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat

I haven't seen a resource for doing that with Tomcat 3.3.x, but that doesn't
mean there isn't one or that nobody has done it.

John

> -Original Message-
> From: Abraham Kang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 4:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Load balancing Tomcat 3.3 from Apache with mod_jk or 
> mod_jserve
> 
> 
> Hi All,
> 
>I have searched through Google Groups and the Tomcat User 
> archives but I
> can't find any threads that
> detail the configuration required to get Apache load 
> balancing to Tomcat
> 3.3.1 through mod_jk or mod_jserve.
> 
>I have found references for how to set up Tomat 4.x and 
> 4.1.x to load
> balance using the
>  but this does not exist in 
> Tomcat 3.3.1.
> 
>I have also found references for how to set up load 
> balancing with Tomcat
> 3.2 using
>
>  name="handler"
> 
> value="org.apache.tomcat.service.connector.Ajp12ConnectionHandler"/>
>  name="port"
> value="8007"/>
>  name="max_threads"
> value="100"/>
>  name="max_spare_threads"
> value="40"/>
>  name="min_spare_threads"
> value="20" />
>
> 
>but I have not found any references to the  element
>in the Tomcat 3.3 server configuration reference.
> 
>Can anyone help me with the configuration specifics for Tomcat's
> server.xml for Tomcat 3.3.1.
> 
>I also looked at mod_jserver but it can only partition 
> load (no load
> balance with sticky sessions)
>based on URL mappings for example:
>   /abc  www.serverone.com
>   /def  www.servertwo.com
> 
>I have spent the whole weekend trying to get this working 
> and by boss is
> telling me it is possible.
> 
> Warmest Regards,
> Abraham
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> 
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> 
> 

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

Re: load balancing with in-process workers in 3.3.1

[George McKinney]

Hmmm, after digging through some more of the docs, it looks like the
inprocess workers aren't available for Apache. Is this correct?

But I'm still curious. would the setup I outlined work on a server on which
the inprocess workers are supported?


George.

- Original Message -
From: "George McKinney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tomcat User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 7:46 PM
Subject: load balancing with in-process workers in 3.3.1


> Under Tomcat 3.3.1 on linux, is it possible/reasonable to have multiple
> in-process workers and use a loadbalancing worker with them?
>
> I'd like to set up workers inprocess1 and inprocess2
> have them load balanced by worker loadbalancer
>
> If I'm deciphering the docs correctly, the mod_jk.conf file would include
> something similar to:
>
> JkMount  /servlet/* loadbalancer
>
> and I would setup workers.properties with (in addition to the inprocess
> specific properties):
>
> worker.list=loadbalancer
> ...
> worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=inprocess1, inprocess2
>
> Thanks,
>
> George McKinney
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> =
> An experienced developer knows that it is seldom wise to
> prefix a demonstration with anything more predictive than
> "Watch this" - unless there is a good test suite in place.
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:

> For additional commands, e-mail:

>


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

Re: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster

[Robert L Sowders]

Here is a nice article that might help with clustering.

http://www2.theserverside.com/resources/article.jsp?l=Tomcat

rls






Bernd Koecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10/28/2002 01:45 AM
Please respond to "Tomcat Users List"

 
To: Tomcat Users List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: 
        Subject:Re: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster


Hi,

it seems that you want to use mod_jk on the nodes as balancer. We don't 
use it 
in that way. We have a load balancer in front of our nodes, which has a 
standby 
balancer, if the first one goes down. If we want to get your requested 
behavior, 
we had to configure this on our load balancer, not on the nodes. This 
balancer 
knows nothing about apache, tomcat and mod_jk. So I don't know how to 
manage it 
with mod_jk.

I don't know how your config should work. Because if N1 routes to all 
other 
nodes and N1 goes down, how should your client know, that he had to 
connect to 
N2? You need some logic in front of your cluster, that the clients see 
your 
cluster as one big server. If you want something like standby or hot 
standby you 
must implement this in the front logic, not on the nodes. And I don't know 
if 
this is possible with jk1.

Why do you limit the balancing to N1? Most of the work is done in your 
servlets. 
The balancing is not so hard, that it will bring your node down. If all 
nodes do 
balancing its no problem, if one node goes down.

But may be I don't understand your scenario.

Bernd

Alexander Piavka wrote:
>  Bernd thanks for your reply.
> 
>  There is one more question i have.
>  I have 3 nodes N1,N2,N3 each runs apache and tomcat. On node N1 i want
> to run lb_worker1 which will route all requests between all nodes.
> All apache servers will send requests to this lb_worker1.
> On node N2 i want to run lb_worker2 which will start routing  all 
requests
> between all nodes ONLY then lb_worker1 goes down.
> I don't know if it is possible to make this configuration in
> workers.properties file.
>  As i see i on each node workers.proprerties file should have bl_worker
> which will route requests between bl_worker1 bl_worker2. And bl_worker1
> should have very high lbfactor and bl_worker2 very low:
> 
> worker.bl_worker.type=lb
> worker.bl_worker.balanced_workers=bl_worker1,bl_worker2
> 
> but this is probably illegal as load balancers don't have lbfactor,
> and balancers can't have other balancers in their balanced_workers
> property.
>  Please tell me if i can make the above scenario work.
> 

[...]


-- 
Dipl.-Inform. Bernd Koecke
UNIX-Entwicklung
Schlund+Partner AG
Fon: +49-721-91374-0
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





attbf0fo.dat
Description: Binary data
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:tomcat-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:tomcat-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org>

RE: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster

[Alexander Piavka]

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Turner, John wrote:

>
> Can you explain how having Apache load balance to Tomcat helps in your
> scenario?
>
> As you've explained:
>
> N1: Apache + Tomcat
> N2: Apache + Tomcat
> N3: Apache + Tomcat
>
> Apparently, you have it setup so that your 3 Apaches get load-balanced
> traffic.
 yes

 My first goal is to acheive high-availability of apache and tomcat
servers and only then performance. I want Ni-Apache to route requests only
to Ni-Tomcat, but if I want to take down Ni-Tomcat for some reason, i want
Ni-Apache to start routing requests to the other two remote Tomcats.
Since if Ni-Apache has got a load-balanced request it should redirct it
to some Tomcat. So i don't want Apache to load balance to Tomcat.

 I tried to acheve this with Third setup,as explained below, but
did not suceed(see below)

> How then, does forcing N1-Apache to load balance to N1-Tomcat,
> N2-Tomcat, N3-Tomcat solve anything or increase your performance?
>
> Seems like you will just be spinning in circles...you have N1 deciding which
> N to send a request to, with failover, but then you have each N deciding
> which T to send a request to.  So a request comes in, N1 decides to send it
> to N2, but then the connector on N2 decides to send the request to the
> Tomcat on N3  Yikes.

 Yes it's ugly, but because i did not suceed with Third setup i thought of
this (Second) setup, but i could not implement it also.

> I think you might be able to make a difference if you were to separate your
> Apache and Tomcat services, like this:
>
> N1: Apache
> N2: Apache
> N3: Apache
>
> T1: Tomcat
> T2: Tomcat
> T3: Tomcat
>
> 6 machines instead of 3.  Then, on each N, you have a JK load-balancing
> setup that includes T1, T2, and T3.  Maybe I am missing something, but I
> don't see what advantage load-balancing to Tomcat gives you when the Tomcats
> are on the same machines as the Apaches, especially if one or more of the
> Apaches goes down.   I also don't see what advantage you are getting making
> N1 do both load routing and simple request serving.
>
> As Bernd mentioned, a typical scenario would be:
>
> Internet -> Load Balancer -> Apache server -> Tomcat server
>
> All on separate boxes.  Right now you have everything on one box. I would
> think that if the Apache on N1 is down, it would be safe to assume that the
> Tomcat on N1 is down also, so it seems like a lot of work for not much
> benefit.

 Yes,if Ni is down. Or if i want to take down Apache Ni then i can
allow myself first to take down Tomcat Ni. But if i want to take down
Tomcat Ni , there is no way i'm going to take Apache Ni down too.

 The best solution for me is session replication in tomcat, as this solves
all my problems, but this is not implemented yet for tomcat 4.1, or i'm
wrong?

 Thanks.

> I'm not criticizing, just trying to understand what advantages you are
> getting with your environment.  Yes, the failover is nice, but so far I see
> no advantage to doing all of that load-balancing.  Have you done any load
> testing on this scenario?  I would think your time per request would
> actually go up...there is a lot of processing/decision-making going on just
> to serve a simple request.


> John
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Alexander Piavka [mailto:piavka@;cs.bgu.ac.il]
> > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 9:25 AM
> > To: Tomcat Users List
> > Subject: Re: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster
> >
> >
> >
> >  Hi Brend,
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > it seems that you want to use mod_jk on the nodes as
> > balancer. We don't use it
> > > in that way. We have a load balancer in front of our nodes,
> > which has a standby
> > > balancer, if the first one goes down. If we want to get
> > your requested behavior,
> > > we had to configure this on our load balancer, not on the
> > nodes. This balancer
> > > knows nothing about apache, tomcat and mod_jk. So I don't
> > know how to manage it
> > > with mod_jk.
> > >
> > > I don't know how your config should work. Because if N1
> > routes to all other
> > > nodes and N1 goes down, how should your client know, that
> > he had to connect to
> > > N2? You need some logic in front of your cluster, that the
> > clients see your
> > > cluster as one big server. If you want something like
> > standby or hot standby you
> > > must implement this in the front logic, not on the nodes.
> > And I don't know if
> > > this is possible with jk1.
> > >
> > > Why do you limit the balancing to N1? Most 

RE: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster

[Turner, John]

Can you explain how having Apache load balance to Tomcat helps in your
scenario?

As you've explained:

N1: Apache + Tomcat
N2: Apache + Tomcat
N3: Apache + Tomcat

Apparently, you have it setup so that your 3 Apaches get load-balanced
traffic.  How then, does forcing N1-Apache to load balance to N1-Tomcat,
N2-Tomcat, N3-Tomcat solve anything or increase your performance?  

Seems like you will just be spinning in circles...you have N1 deciding which
N to send a request to, with failover, but then you have each N deciding
which T to send a request to.  So a request comes in, N1 decides to send it
to N2, but then the connector on N2 decides to send the request to the
Tomcat on N3  Yikes.

I think you might be able to make a difference if you were to separate your
Apache and Tomcat services, like this:

N1: Apache
N2: Apache
N3: Apache

T1: Tomcat
T2: Tomcat
T3: Tomcat

6 machines instead of 3.  Then, on each N, you have a JK load-balancing
setup that includes T1, T2, and T3.  Maybe I am missing something, but I
don't see what advantage load-balancing to Tomcat gives you when the Tomcats
are on the same machines as the Apaches, especially if one or more of the
Apaches goes down.   I also don't see what advantage you are getting making
N1 do both load routing and simple request serving.

As Bernd mentioned, a typical scenario would be:

Internet -> Load Balancer -> Apache server -> Tomcat server

All on separate boxes.  Right now you have everything on one box.  I would
think that if the Apache on N1 is down, it would be safe to assume that the
Tomcat on N1 is down also, so it seems like a lot of work for not much
benefit.

I'm not criticizing, just trying to understand what advantages you are
getting with your environment.  Yes, the failover is nice, but so far I see
no advantage to doing all of that load-balancing.  Have you done any load
testing on this scenario?  I would think your time per request would
actually go up...there is a lot of processing/decision-making going on just
to serve a simple request.

John

> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Piavka [mailto:piavka@;cs.bgu.ac.il]
> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 9:25 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster
> 
> 
> 
>  Hi Brend,
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > it seems that you want to use mod_jk on the nodes as 
> balancer. We don't use it
> > in that way. We have a load balancer in front of our nodes, 
> which has a standby
> > balancer, if the first one goes down. If we want to get 
> your requested behavior,
> > we had to configure this on our load balancer, not on the 
> nodes. This balancer
> > knows nothing about apache, tomcat and mod_jk. So I don't 
> know how to manage it
> > with mod_jk.
> >
> > I don't know how your config should work. Because if N1 
> routes to all other
> > nodes and N1 goes down, how should your client know, that 
> he had to connect to
> > N2? You need some logic in front of your cluster, that the 
> clients see your
> > cluster as one big server. If you want something like 
> standby or hot standby you
> > must implement this in the front logic, not on the nodes. 
> And I don't know if
> > this is possible with jk1.
> >
> > Why do you limit the balancing to N1? Most of the work is 
> done in your servlets.
> > The balancing is not so hard, that it will bring your node 
> down. If all nodes do
> > balancing its no problem, if one node goes down.
> >
> > But may be I don't understand your scenario.
> 
>  Hope now i'll be clear with my needs and problems.
>  I have two levels of web clustering/balancing. First one 
> done with Linux Virtual
> Server(lvs). The cluster has 3 nodes N1,N2,N3, which client 
> sees as one big server.
> Each node has apache + tomcat. N1 behaves as the loadbalancer 
> and routes
> the http requests between N1,N2,N3 apaches and it has 
> persistence for the
> http connections. So N1 is the master router/balancer. Now 
> node N2 acts as
> backup router/balancer. If N1 goes down, N2 detects this and activates
> his backup router/balancer. This is implemented by Keepalived.
> Also the http connections are replicated between N1 and N2, so client
> does not loose connection if N1 goes down(unless it has connection to
> apache on N1). Thus i have load balancing + high 
> availability. This setup
> works ok.
> 
>  Now the second level of clustering/balancing should be done between
> apache servers and the tomcat servers on N1,N2,N3. I have 3 
> ideas how to
> implenet this.
> 
>  First: session replication between tomcat servers done with  
> JavaGroups Library
> and Tomcat Session Replication Library writen by Filip Ha

Re: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster

[Alexander Piavka]

 Hi Brend,

> Hi,
>
> it seems that you want to use mod_jk on the nodes as balancer. We don't use it
> in that way. We have a load balancer in front of our nodes, which has a standby
> balancer, if the first one goes down. If we want to get your requested behavior,
> we had to configure this on our load balancer, not on the nodes. This balancer
> knows nothing about apache, tomcat and mod_jk. So I don't know how to manage it
> with mod_jk.
>
> I don't know how your config should work. Because if N1 routes to all other
> nodes and N1 goes down, how should your client know, that he had to connect to
> N2? You need some logic in front of your cluster, that the clients see your
> cluster as one big server. If you want something like standby or hot standby you
> must implement this in the front logic, not on the nodes. And I don't know if
> this is possible with jk1.
>
> Why do you limit the balancing to N1? Most of the work is done in your servlets.
> The balancing is not so hard, that it will bring your node down. If all nodes do
> balancing its no problem, if one node goes down.
>
> But may be I don't understand your scenario.

 Hope now i'll be clear with my needs and problems.
 I have two levels of web clustering/balancing. First one done with Linux Virtual
Server(lvs). The cluster has 3 nodes N1,N2,N3, which client sees as one big server.
Each node has apache + tomcat. N1 behaves as the loadbalancer and routes
the http requests between N1,N2,N3 apaches and it has persistence for the
http connections. So N1 is the master router/balancer. Now node N2 acts as
backup router/balancer. If N1 goes down, N2 detects this and activates
his backup router/balancer. This is implemented by Keepalived.
Also the http connections are replicated between N1 and N2, so client
does not loose connection if N1 goes down(unless it has connection to
apache on N1). Thus i have load balancing + high availability. This setup
works ok.

 Now the second level of clustering/balancing should be done between
apache servers and the tomcat servers on N1,N2,N3. I have 3 ideas how to
implenet this.

 First: session replication between tomcat servers done with  JavaGroups Library
and Tomcat Session Replication Library writen by Filip Hanik. But this
library, for tomcat 4.1, is currently in development and no code has beed
released for download yet.

 Second: Setup two balancers/routers on N1 and N2 with mod_jk1. By default
all apache servers will route requests to N1, and it will loadbalance them
between N1,N2,N3 tomcats.If N1 goes down(or just apache on N1), then N2
will get all request and loadbalance them between N2,N3(and N1 in case
only apache on N1 is down). -> This as i NOW understand can't be
implemented with mod_jk1. Maybe you have an idea how to implement this
without changing the first level clustering?

 Third: apache on N'th node will route all requests to the local tomcat
on the same N'th node. If local tomcat goes down, apache will start
routing requests to tomcats on other nodes which will be session persistent.
I tried to implenent this in two ways:

1) For each node: I set jvmRoute on each tomcat server.xml file to be dirrerent accross
all tomcat servers. On the local node for the local worker i set
local_worker=1 and for the remote workers local_worker=0.All workers with
same lbfactor=1.
 The problem with this setup is: if local tomcat worker goes down
then mod_jk just makes rountrobin between the remote workers without
session persistance, since remote workers have local_worker=0.

Since i need session persistance i tried another way:
2) For each node: I set jvmRoute on each tomcat server.xml file to be dirrerent accross
all tomcat servers. For all workers i set local_worker=1. But since i want
local apache direct reques to the local worker only(when it is up).
I made for the local worker lbfactor=100 an for the remote workers lbfactor=1.
 But it seems like mod_jk ignores the lbfactor then all workers have local_worker=1.
I also tried lbfactor=0 for the remote workers, and other values but this
did not change mod_jk behaviour.
 In all cases the old and new sessions were forwarded to one SAME remote
worker. Then i played with taking down/up workers the mod_jk routing
would work in unreasonable ways. I could not even understand the patters
of it's routing.(Then i was testing this i had only one local apache
running in the cluster, so that it will recieve all http request in the
cluster, so this behavoiour has nothing to do fith the first level routing/balancing).

 If you have any ideas how to make the third setup work, or you have other
ideas for setup i'll be very glad to hear.
 Thanks a lot.


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

Re: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster

[Bernd Koecke]

Hi,

it seems that you want to use mod_jk on the nodes as balancer. We don't use it 
in that way. We have a load balancer in front of our nodes, which has a standby 
balancer, if the first one goes down. If we want to get your requested behavior, 
we had to configure this on our load balancer, not on the nodes. This balancer 
knows nothing about apache, tomcat and mod_jk. So I don't know how to manage it 
with mod_jk.

I don't know how your config should work. Because if N1 routes to all other 
nodes and N1 goes down, how should your client know, that he had to connect to 
N2? You need some logic in front of your cluster, that the clients see your 
cluster as one big server. If you want something like standby or hot standby you 
must implement this in the front logic, not on the nodes. And I don't know if 
this is possible with jk1.

Why do you limit the balancing to N1? Most of the work is done in your servlets. 
The balancing is not so hard, that it will bring your node down. If all nodes do 
balancing its no problem, if one node goes down.

But may be I don't understand your scenario.

Bernd

Alexander Piavka wrote:
 Bernd thanks for your reply.

 There is one more question i have.
 I have 3 nodes N1,N2,N3 each runs apache and tomcat. On node N1 i want
to run lb_worker1 which will route all requests between all nodes.
All apache servers will send requests to this lb_worker1.
On node N2 i want to run lb_worker2 which will start routing  all requests
between all nodes ONLY then lb_worker1 goes down.
I don't know if it is possible to make this configuration in
workers.properties file.
 As i see i on each node workers.proprerties file should have bl_worker
which will route requests between bl_worker1 bl_worker2. And bl_worker1
should have very high lbfactor and bl_worker2 very low:

worker.bl_worker.type=lb
worker.bl_worker.balanced_workers=bl_worker1,bl_worker2

but this is probably illegal as load balancers don't have lbfactor,
and balancers can't have other balancers in their balanced_workers
property.
 Please tell me if i can make the above scenario work.



[...]


--
Dipl.-Inform. Bernd Koecke
UNIX-Entwicklung
Schlund+Partner AG
Fon: +49-721-91374-0
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



msg71365/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: load balancing with routing with mod_jk in cluster

[Alexander Piavka]

 Bernd thanks for your reply.

 There is one more question i have.
 I have 3 nodes N1,N2,N3 each runs apache and tomcat. On node N1 i want
to run lb_worker1 which will route all requests between all nodes.
All apache servers will send requests to this lb_worker1.
On node N2 i want to run lb_worker2 which will start routing  all requests
between all nodes ONLY then lb_worker1 goes down.
I don't know if it is possible to make this configuration in
workers.properties file.
 As i see i on each node workers.proprerties file should have bl_worker
which will route requests between bl_worker1 bl_worker2. And bl_worker1
should have very high lbfactor and bl_worker2 very low:

worker.bl_worker.type=lb
worker.bl_worker.balanced_workers=bl_worker1,bl_worker2

but this is probably illegal as load balancers don't have lbfactor,
and balancers can't have other balancers in their balanced_workers
property.
 Please tell me if i can make the above scenario work.

 Thanks



> Hi,
>
> This part of the docs came from me and we use such a configuration here at work,
> but we use tomcat 4.0.x and mod_jk1.
>
> Alexander Piavka wrote:
> >  Hi,
> > I have lvs cluster of 3 nodes, on each node i have apache1.3 + tomcat4.1.12+mod_jk
> > serving identical data. The http service on lvs is configured with persistent 
>connection.
> > So in normal operation i want that apache on each node will route requests
> > to tomcat on the same node.
>
> This is done by mod_jk and the jvmRoute in tomcat's server.xml.
>
> >
> >  In addition if ,for example, i want to take down tomcat on one node, then
> > i would like that apache on the same node will start routing requrests to
> > the other two tomcats on the other nodes. Now if the tomcat comes back
> > then i would like to continue to route requests only with an old session
> > to to the other two tomcats.
> >  How can i enable this with load balancing in mod_jk?
> > As i understand this can be done with setting local_worker=1 for all
> > tomcat workers or only for the local tomcat worker.
> > and how do i tell apache to forward the requests to load balancers
> > on the other two nodes? How apache knows what there are other two remote
> > load balancers, i.e should i somehow add them to local worker.properties?
> > what lbfactor values should i give to the local and remote tomcat workers?
>
> Here we have to clarify some things. You have only one load balancer in your
> system and thats the one in front of your nodes. We should name the module in
> apache mod_jk and this has one lb_worker. But we should not think about it as a
> load balancer. That makes things easier. This lb_worker consists of a number of
> e.g. ajp13 worker. These ajp13 worker are holding the connection to the tomcat
> instance on the same (local) and on the other nodes. The mod_jk module will
> route the requests with a session to the node which generated the session, by
> the extension of the session id, the jvmRoute. Now you have sticky sessions,
> without session replication.
>
> When a request without a session arrives it will be balanced by the module to
> one of the nodes. If you set 'local_worker=1' only for the local ajp13 worker,
> these requests will be routed only to the local worker. If this local worker is
> down the new requests will be routed to one of the other nodes. But when you set
> local_worker_only=1 for the lb_worker, these requests will get an error
> response. We need this for the right behavior when we switch off one node for
> maintenance.
>
> We have the lb_value of all nodes set to the same value, because we don't use
> the balancing of mod_jk.
>
> >
> >  How can i take down the tomcat cleanly, so that it goes down only
> > after all old sessions to it end. As i have read in Workers HowTo
> > this can be done with some special port if i set local_worker_only=1 for
> > the load balancer worker, but how i switch this port off before shuting
> > down tomcat? Or the old sessions can be just routed to another
> > load balancers. If so then how?
>
> This functionality comes not from apache-mod_jk-tomcat. When we want to switch
> off one node, we switch off a special port on this node. The load balancer calls
> this port of all nodes periodically. If this port is off the node will be marked
> as down. After this, the node doesn't get any requests. The balancer doesn't
> know anything about sessions, he does only round robin balancing. The routing
> for the sessions is done by mod_jk on the other nodes. Now the switched off node
> gets only request with a session on it, no new ones. Because of the session
> timeout after some time there are no active sessions on the node. You can see
> this e.g. by session listeners. Now you can savely shutdown tomcat without
> loosing session data. But the session timeout will be reset with every request
> which accesses the session.
>
> Its possible to save session data before shutdown and read it in after restart,
> but this is dangerouse in two ways. If you change a c