Hi Rainer, Thanks for the reply. Answers to your questions below,
Rainer Jung-3 wrote: > > Jus to make sure, we are talking about the same kind of observation: > could you please describe independently, how the observed problem looks > like in your case? > In development, the developers are getting other people pages. So user1 requests pageA and gets user2's pageB. In production, we don't get user input, but the probe on the load balancer is not getting the response it is looking for, so it thinks the machine its checking is down. The probe is called serverlive.jsp. Here is the accesslog entry during the problem (13 being the primary LB, 14 the backup): xxx.xxx.xxx.14 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:09:53 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 200 13 xxx.xxx.xxx.13 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:09:54 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 200 13 xxx.xxx.xxx.14 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:09:59 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 200 13 xxx.xxx.xxx.13 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:09:59 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 200 13 xxx.xxx.xxx.14 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:10:04 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 1070 xxx.xxx.xxx.13 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:10:05 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 1070 xxx.xxx.xxx.14 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:10:10 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 1070 xxx.xxx.xxx.13 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:10:10 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 1070 xxx.xxx.xxx.14 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:11:00 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 1070 xxx.xxx.xxx.14 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:12:34 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 997 xxx.xxx.xxx.13 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:11:46 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 997 xxx.xxx.xxx.13 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:12:31 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 997 xxx.xxx.xxx.13 - - [12/Mar/2009:23:11:01 -0500] "GET /serverlive.jsp " 503 997 I'll try and get some log entries from development. Rainer Jung-3 wrote: > > Since you see the problem with mod_jk2 and with mod_jk I somehow doubt, > that it comes form mod_jk (but hey, I'm involved in mod_jk development, > so that might simply be defense. > This is the main reason I posted here. If I'm indeed seeing the same problem as the others here, then my case may disprove the mod_jk theory. Or perhaps the issue resides in both my versions? Rainer Jung-3 wrote: > > What is obvious, your Tomcat is *very* outdated. You are using a no > longer supported major version (5.0) and with 5.0 you are using a very > old minor version. > > If you have any chance, upgrade your Tomcat. > Yes, I know. I'll see what I can do. Rainer Jung-3 wrote: > > Apart from that: what else can you tell about the problem? Are there log > entries either from mod_jk, Apache httpd or Tomcat associated with these > events? Would you be able to snoop traffic between httpd and Tomcat and > between httpd and the clients? > We haven't been seen any errors, in any logs. I can go through the logs and compare them, and then compare those findings between the enviroments. Not sure whats involved in snooping traffic. I can look into that as well. Rainer Jung-3 wrote: > > Where did you get your mod_jk from? How was it build? > Not sure the answer to that. Both were installed by other people, who either don't recall their orgins, or are no longer employed here. I'm working on building the 1.2.27 from source right now. We're x86, not sparc, by the way. Thanks for your help. Please let me know of anything else I can provide. I will make updates as new information comes up. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Apache-mod_jk-serves-random-files-from-tomcat-tp18385568p22500565.html Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
