Connector issues

2005-06-22 Thread Slobodan Vujasinovic
Hi, we, in Enhydra Development Team, have a little problem with Tomcat 5.5.9 administration. There are some Connector issues that I want to point out here. 1. In new Enhydra 6.4-1 (based on Tomcat 5.5.9) we are enabling secure SSL HTTP Connector initialization (default connector configuration

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-20 Thread jean-frederic clere
Mladen Turk wrote: Hi, Just noticed a strange behavior in the Java part of the JK dealing with large (over 8184 bytes) data transfers. Since with 8192 bytes AJP packet size, the maximum transferred size per each packet is 8184 bytes one would expect that for 2 bytes file the packets would be

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-20 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: jean-frederic clere [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tomcat Developers List tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 9:02 AM Subject: Re: AJP/Java connector issues Mladen Turk wrote: Hi, Just noticed a strange behavior in the Java part of the JK

AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread Mladen Turk
Hi, Just noticed a strange behavior in the Java part of the JK dealing with large (over 8184 bytes) data transfers. Since with 8192 bytes AJP packet size, the maximum transferred size per each packet is 8184 bytes one would expect that for 2 bytes file the packets would be in a form of:

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread jean-frederic clere
Mladen Turk wrote: Hi, Just noticed a strange behavior in the Java part of the JK dealing with large (over 8184 bytes) data transfers. Since with 8192 bytes AJP packet size, the maximum transferred size per each packet is 8184 bytes one would expect that for 2 bytes file the packets would be

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread jean-frederic clere
Mladen Turk wrote: Hi, Just noticed a strange behavior in the Java part of the JK dealing with large (over 8184 bytes) data transfers. Since with 8192 bytes AJP packet size, the maximum transferred size per each packet is 8184 bytes one would expect that for 2 bytes file the packets would be

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tomcat Developers List tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Cc: Bill Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 11:44 PM Subject: AJP/Java connector issues Hi, Just noticed a strange behavior in the Java part of the JK

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tomcat Developers List tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Cc: Bill Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 11:44 PM Subject: AJP/Java connector issues Hi, Just noticed a strange behavior in the Java part of the JK

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread Mladen Turk
Bill Barker wrote: I see what this is now: The default Connector OutputBuffer size is 8K, so it's sending the output to JkInputStream in 8K chunks. JkInputStream sends all of the 8K to Apache in two chunks. As a Coyote OutputBuffer, it's not really JkInputStream's job to do additional

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: Mladen Turk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tomcat Developers List tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 2:19 PM Subject: Re: AJP/Java connector issues Bill Barker wrote: I see what this is now: The default Connector OutputBuffer size is 8K

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread Mladen Turk
Bill Barker wrote: Is something like that possible? It would be really easy to default to 8184 for all Connectors (just change the value in o.a.c.connector.OutputBuffer). I'm not so sure how happy that would make Remy. Not much I'm afraid ;) It wouldn't be too hard to have

Re: AJP/Java connector issues

2005-05-19 Thread Remy Maucherat
Mladen Turk wrote: Bill Barker wrote: Is something like that possible? It would be really easy to default to 8184 for all Connectors (just change the value in o.a.c.connector.OutputBuffer). I'm not so sure how happy that would make Remy. Not much I'm afraid ;) It wouldn't be too hard to have

Re: Connector issues

2003-04-04 Thread Remy Maucherat
Jeff Tulley wrote: I think I've got a fix for the connector thing, gotta still try it out to be sure. I just thought that the mbeans-descriptors fix is low hanging fruit. IE, with just a simple little fix, every time somebody is forced to go back to the old connector for one reason or another,

Re: Connector issues

2003-04-03 Thread Jeff Tulley
I think I've got a fix for the connector thing, gotta still try it out to be sure. I just thought that the mbeans-descriptors fix is low hanging fruit. IE, with just a simple little fix, every time somebody is forced to go back to the old connector for one reason or another, they won't

Re: Connector issues

2003-04-02 Thread Costin Manolache
Sorry for the delay. IMO the right solution is to fix #10229 for coyote. There are a lot of problems in the old connectors - even if mod_jk2 is not yet as stable as mod_jk1, the java side and coyote are far better than the old impl. I'm +0 on fixing the MBean exception - AFAIK upgrading

Connector issues

2003-04-01 Thread Jeff Tulley
There are some real problems with the Coyote Connectors right now. The main problem biting me (and a few others recently) is bugzilla bug # 10229 - form parameters not being preserved across a login redirection. The answer given on the user list (by me also) is typically, Use an non-Coyote

Re: Connector issues

2003-04-01 Thread Jess M. Holle
Jeff Tulley wrote: There are some real problems with the Coyote Connectors right now. The main problem biting me (and a few others recently) is bugzilla bug # 10229 - form parameters not being preserved across a login redirection. The answer given on the user list (by me also) is typically, Use

Re: Connector issues

2003-04-01 Thread Jeff Tulley
I actually have similar issues with the native side connector story but that is for another day. I was under the impression that mod_jk2 was not production ready by most measures -- and that mod_jk was good enough for most purposes (and quite production ready)... I said those were issues for

[Patch] mbeans-descriptors.xml (was Re: Connector issues)

2003-04-01 Thread Jeff Tulley
Here is the patch for the Ajp13Connector. The one caveat is that this patch allows Tomcat to startup and shutdown without MBean exceptions, but the Tomcat Admin application still will not work with this connector enabled. That is, the admin app functions, but do not click on Connector in the

Re: [Patch] mbeans-descriptors.xml (was Re: Connector issues)

2003-04-01 Thread Remy Maucherat
Jeff Tulley wrote: Here is the patch for the Ajp13Connector. The one caveat is that this patch allows Tomcat to startup and shutdown without MBean exceptions, but the Tomcat Admin application still will not work with this connector enabled. That is, the admin app functions, but do not click on

Re: [Patch] mbeans-descriptors.xml (was Re: Connector issues)

2003-04-01 Thread Jeff Tulley
I agree. But, as I said in my earlier email, there are defects in the Coyote Connector driving people to use something else. If I absolutely need bug#10229 fixed, what choice do I have? I am wondering if the reality is that people will be forced to use the Ajp13Connector, so we might as well

Re: Connector issues

2003-04-01 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: Jeff Tulley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 9:12 AM Subject: Connector issues There are some real problems with the Coyote Connectors right now. The main problem biting me (and a few others recently) is bugzilla bug