[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1448?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12762161#action_12762161
]
Mark Miller commented on SOLR-1448:
-----------------------------------
bq. Are we going to be responsible for all the containers out there?
I'd think we would take it on a case by case basis. We should generally work
with a standards compliant container. We can see from the list that a handful
of users are using weblogic - we can also see that there is a problem, and that
there is a successful fix. I'm not seeing any comments about other containers
that don't work (though perhaps I am missing them). I've seen the weblogic
stuff enough to know about it without looking it up. In any case, I'd go case
by case given the facts.
bq. How many of us have access to Web logic to test this?
Its a point, but we have this issue all the time - hence all of the, can user
please test this in their environ and report back. Thats how Hoss wrangled this
one out as well I believe. And more than one user has confirmed.
bq. What versions of WebLogic are we going to support?
The ones that users alert us don't work and have a simple fix for? We are not
jumping hoops here - this is one specific setting that appears to be
incompatible with the Solr admin UI. If future versions require major other
changes, we would have to reassess. As it is, I think this has already been
reported to make Solr admin work with 8,9, and 10. Thats a free win to me. Its
a binary setting thats being set in this patch - thats it - at worse they will
change it to default as we want. Which they actually did in weblogic 9 - but
only if the web.xml is defined as 2.4 - and ours is 2.3 if I remember right. In
any case, if a user is using a new version and reports issues, I'd think we
would deal with it then based on the facts. This isn't a promise to work
perfect with weblogic forever more any more than I promise to introduce no more
bugs.
bq. Are we going to package different wars for different containers?
No - this is just talking about including a .4kb file that doesn't affect
different containers. No one is talking about making different wars. -1 to
making different wars.
bq. How about other containers?
Case by case as it should be. Hopefully most of them just work as this is
supposed to be standards driven. When we have little issues like this, I'd
think we go case by case.
bq. It's a slippery slope.
I don't think this little patch makes things any more slippery than they are
myself.
> Addition of weblogic.xml required for solr to run under weblogic 10.3
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-1448
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1448
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: web gui
> Affects Versions: 1.4
> Environment: Weblogic 10.3
> Reporter: Ilan Rabinovitch
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.4
>
> Attachments: weblogic.xml
>
>
> Weblogic appears to have filters enabled even on FORWARD, which is listed as
> something that will not function properly in the Solr documentation. As a
> result, the administrative application generates a StackOverflow when
> accessed.
> This can be resolved by adding the attached weblogic.xml file to solr. No
> other changes are required.
> <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
> <weblogic-web-app
> xmlns="http://www.bea.com/ns/weblogic/90";
> xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance";
> xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.bea.com/ns/weblogic/90
> http://www.bea.com/ns/weblogic/90/weblogic-web-app.xsd";>
> <container-descriptor>
>
> <filter-dispatched-requests-enabled>false</filter-dispatched-requests-enabled>
> </container-descriptor>
> </weblogic-web-app>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
