AW: AW: AW: apache 2.0.54 + mod_jk 1.2.14 - sticky sessions not working

2005-10-25 Thread Doehler, Thomas
The system i'm currently testing with is only a little test system, it is not inteded to go productive in that configuration ;-) But thanks for the tip you anyway. The jk.log has no error messages, and here is the log grepped for "found best worker": [Tue Oct 25 15:52:23 2005] [28304:49172] [debug

Re: AW: AW: apache 2.0.54 + mod_jk 1.2.14 - sticky sessions not working

2005-10-25 Thread Mladen Turk
Doehler, Thomas wrote: Hi, IMO having 10 connections limit is way too low for any serious usage. I would suggest that you rise maxProcessor to at least 100. Also do you observe any error messages in mod_jk.log? Regards, Mladen. --

AW: AW: apache 2.0.54 + mod_jk 1.2.14 - sticky sessions not working

2005-10-25 Thread Doehler, Thomas
Hi, here the requested files: workers properties: --- # # wokers.properties - configuration for mod_jk # # configure path separator ps=/ # list of workers by name worker.list=loadbalancer worker.loadbalancer.type=lb worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=debi1, debi2 worker.load

Re: AW: apache 2.0.54 + mod_jk 1.2.14 - sticky sessions not working

2005-10-25 Thread Mladen Turk
Doehler, Thomas wrote: Hi, thanks for the quick response, jvmRoute is configured on both instances. We do not use the standard tomcat url rewriting (which is http://...;jsessionid=...?x=y), we use simply a standard http paramter and do our own url rewriting. Right, but it would be good that

AW: apache 2.0.54 + mod_jk 1.2.14 - sticky sessions not working

2005-10-25 Thread Doehler, Thomas
Hi, thanks for the quick response, jvmRoute is configured on both instances. We do not use the standard tomcat url rewriting (which is http://...;jsessionid=...?x=y), we use simply a standard http paramter and do our own url rewriting. Regards, Tom > Did you set the jvmRoute="your worker name"