-Original Message-
From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In case of single child mpm, nothing.
On others, jkstatus at least.
Also, we adopted the APR as mandatory, so, all platform
specific code except
JNI has to go out (sooner or later).
MT.
That is fine, assuming
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In case of single child mpm, nothing.
On others, jkstatus at least.
Also, we adopted the APR as mandatory, so, all platform
specific code except
JNI has to go out (sooner or later).
MT.
That is
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Assuming that the next mod_jk2 release wants to go with the
present APR
(0.94) or even the CVS (pre 1.0?) then we need to kludge
mod_jk on solaris 8 (at least) to not use APR for this bit.
No it's gonna be 0.95 (the one
Hi,
Also, we adopted the APR as mandatory, so, all platform
specific code
except JNI has to go out (sooner or later).
sure, I know - but you cant expect that every APR also
supports SHM/MMAP; so cant we take only those things which
are common to all platforms?
Does it work in APR from
-Original Message-
From: Guenter Knauf
If it's a APR bug are there any patches that we can propose?
no.
The problem is the NetWare OS self. We had formerly no SHM
The netware, and windows doesn't need shm at all.
that's not true from APR sight: if I look into apr.h for
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Assuming that the next mod_jk2 release wants to go with
the present
APR
(0.94) or even the CVS (pre 1.0?) then we need to kludge
mod_jk on
solaris 8 (at least) to not use APR for this bit.
No it's gonna be 0.95 (the
-Original Message-
From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27 February 2004 16:13
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
hmm, you could check to use the old mmap code which Henri
just has checked in again; get latest jk_shm.c from cvs and
modifiy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Assuming that the next mod_jk2 release wants to go with the
present APR
(0.94) or even the CVS (pre 1.0?) then we need to kludge
mod_jk on solaris 8 (at least) to not use APR for this bit.
No it's gonna be 0.95 (the one distributed
Hi,
Look at my today post (JK2 shm).
It's going to use the shm.
If the platform is missing APR_HAS_SHARED_MEMORY the shm will be disabled.
Also you can alway set the shm to disabled if the APR platform MMAP is
buggy.
but what will we all loose if then the scoreboard isnt active??
Guenter.
-Original Message-
From: Guenter Knauf
Look at my today post (JK2 shm).
It's going to use the shm.
If the platform is missing APR_HAS_SHARED_MEMORY the shm
will be disabled.
Also you can alway set the shm to disabled if the APR
platform MMAP is
buggy.
but what will
In my apache 2.0.48 install the version of apr is 0.95.
Glenn
On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 05:04:17PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27 February 2004 16:13
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
Hi Mladen,
but what will we all loose if then the scoreboard isnt active??
In case of single child mpm, nothing.
On others, jkstatus at least.
so the scoreboard is only for collecting stats?
Also, we adopted the APR as mandatory, so, all platform specific code
except JNI has to go out
-Original Message-
From: Guenter Knauf
but what will we all loose if then the scoreboard isnt active??
In case of single child mpm, nothing.
On others, jkstatus at least.
so the scoreboard is only for collecting stats?
And for load balancing stats.
Also, we adopted
continued to be used. Which is our case is handy.
We might look at 4.1.3x in a few months depending on issues with 4.1.29.
Thanks anyway!
Greg
-Original Message-
From: David Rees [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 26 February 2004 19:33
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
Dear All,
Testing the jk2-2.0.3 cvs we seem to get this error, which makes 2.0.3-dev
useable for us.
I can only assume others are not seeing this (apache 1.3.26 + mod_perl) on
Solaris 2.8 (sparc). Has anyone had any success with 1.3.x on Solaris with
the jk2-dev code?
I an getting apr and
Hi,
Testing the jk2-2.0.3 cvs we seem to get this error, which makes 2.0.3-dev
useable for us.
you mean 2.0.4-dev?
I can only assume others are not seeing this (apache 1.3.26 + mod_perl) on
Solaris 2.8 (sparc). Has anyone had any success with 1.3.x on Solaris
with the jk2-dev code?
Hi Greg,
look at your apr.h for APR_HAS_MMAP and tell us how this is set...
#define APR_HAS_MMAP 1
thats strange. Is is possible that there's a permission issue with creating the file?
Can you please try to configure the shm file to be created in a public writable dir,
f.e. /tmp
-Original Message-
From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27 February 2004 13:20
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
Hi Greg,
look at your apr.h for APR_HAS_MMAP and tell us how this is set...
#define APR_HAS_MMAP 1
thats strange
Hi,
Permissions should be ok. It does create a file, but with 0 size (even
though we have set something like 16m)
ie:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root other 0 Feb 27 12:31
cr.sandwich.pfizer.com_81.shm
Compared to the old version (same config bar the name and old conector
used)
/* First make sure the file exists and is big enough
*/
rc=apr_file_open( file, shm-fname,
APR_READ | APR_WRITE | APR_CREATE | APR_BINARY,
APR_WREAD|APR_WWRITE|APR_WEXECUTE,
globalShmPool);
Thanks Guenter,
Same sort of issue:
Hi Greg,
Same sort of issue:
[Fri Feb 27 15:12:08 2004] (error ) [jk_shm.c (163)] shm.create(): error
creating /tmp/cr.sandwich.pfizer.com_81.shm 2117992 22 0x1f5020 Invalid
argument
[Fri Feb 27 15:12:08 2004] (error ) [jk_shm.c (238)] shm.create(): error
mmapping
PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 February 2004 21:43
To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: RE: jk2 buglets II
On Mon, February 23, 2004 1at 0:28 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does restarting the Tomcat instance free up the stuck processes?
Yup. Apache seems to recover fine, as the socket gets reset
/disagree and commit/not commit appropriately.
Thanks.
Greg
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 23 February 2004 16:32
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: jk2 buglets
Hi All,
We have been running into different issues with jk2
concerning
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 26 February 2004 10:45
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
Hi All,
We have been giving the latest CVS code for mod_jk2 a
thorough test to look
towards using it as our next production release.
Happy to say that thus
Hi,
Sorry, this seems to be a bad week.
The diff should be:
$ diff jk_shm.c.org jk_shm.c
can you please use unified diffs:
diff -u jk_shm.c.org jk_shm.c
this is the preferred patch form with all ASF stuff...
Guenter.
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This seemed to be an issue with tomcat 4.1.24.
Using 4.1.29 resolves this issue.
Thanks for the pointers, especially the one to open my eyes and check
which tomcat version I was using.
While you're at it, you should upgrade to 4.1.30 which fixes some memory
leaks
;
return rc;
}
Greg
-Original Message-
From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 26 February 2004 11:32
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
Hi,
Sorry, this seems to be a bad week.
The diff should be:
$ diff jk_shm.c.org jk_shm.c
can you
Hi All,
We have been running into different issues with jk2 concerning shared memory
(on Solaris 8)
Calls to the function jk2_shm_create fail logging the following in the
jk2.log file,
[Mon Feb 23 12:12:00 2004] (error ) [jk_shm.c (199)] shm.create(): error
creating /tmp/shm.file 2117728
We seem to have another buglet with mod_jk2 2.0.2. We seem to be unable to
recreate the bug using ab, but when one of our busiest servers has been
running for a few hours we get apache children stuck (at times upto 100
children are blocked, which is how we found the issue as the server appeared
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We seem to have another buglet with mod_jk2 2.0.2. We seem to be unable to
recreate the bug using ab, but when one of our busiest servers has been
running for a few hours we get apache children stuck (at times upto 100
children are blocked, which is how we found the
Which Tomcat on the remote side ?
3.3, 4.0, 4.1, 5.0 ?
Sorry forgot that:
4.1.29 with jdk 1.4.2_02
Greg
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Which Tomcat on the remote side ?
3.3, 4.0, 4.1, 5.0 ?
Sorry forgot that:
Sorry being an idiot. This is presently on 4.1.24.
Leave this with me... I've made a mistake and need to retest with 4.1.29.
Due to having to qualify (extensively test and document) out installs we are
always
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, On 2/23/2004 8:37 AM:
We seem to have another buglet with mod_jk2 2.0.2. We seem to be unable to
recreate the bug using ab, but when one of our busiest servers has been
running for a few hours we get apache children stuck (at times upto 100
children are blocked, which is
Does restarting the Tomcat instance free up the stuck processes?
-Dave
Yup. Apache seems to recover fine, as the socket gets reset.
Greg
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL
On Mon, February 23, 2004 1at 0:28 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does restarting the Tomcat instance free up the stuck processes?
Yup. Apache seems to recover fine, as the socket gets reset.
OK, can you figure out what Tomcat is doing when these processes get
stuck? It seems that you may have
35 matches
Mail list logo
