cvs commit: jakarta-tomcat-catalina/webapps/docs changelog.xml
remm2005/08/19 01:00:37
Modified:http11/src/java/org/apache/coyote/http11
Http11AprProcessor.java
webapps/docs changelog.xml
Log:
- Disable the built-in HTTP compression when sendfile is used for a resource.
Revision ChangesPath
1.32 +1 -2
jakarta-tomcat-connectors/http11/src/java/org/apache/coyote/http11/Http11AprProcessor.java
Index: Http11AprProcessor.java
===
RCS file:
/home/cvs/jakarta-tomcat-connectors/http11/src/java/org/apache/coyote/http11/Http11AprProcessor.java,v
retrieving revision 1.31
retrieving revision 1.32
diff -u -r1.31 -r1.32
--- Http11AprProcessor.java 4 Aug 2005 07:07:57 - 1.31
+++ Http11AprProcessor.java 19 Aug 2005 08:00:37 - 1.32
@@ -1583,9 +1583,8 @@
// Check for compression
boolean useCompression = false;
-if (entityBody (compressionLevel 0)) {
+if (entityBody (compressionLevel 0) (sendfileData == null)) {
useCompression = isCompressable();
-
// Change content-length to -1 to force chunking
if (useCompression) {
response.setContentLength(-1);
1.360 +3 -0 jakarta-tomcat-catalina/webapps/docs/changelog.xml
Index: changelog.xml
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-tomcat-catalina/webapps/docs/changelog.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.359
retrieving revision 1.360
diff -u -r1.359 -r1.360
--- changelog.xml 18 Aug 2005 13:25:18 - 1.359
+++ changelog.xml 19 Aug 2005 08:00:37 - 1.360
@@ -129,6 +129,9 @@
bug36173/bug: Add missing sync in FastHttpDateFormat.formatDate,
submitted
by Alexei Krainiouk (remm)
/fix
+ fix
+Disable HTTP compression when sendfile is used for a resource (remm)
+ /fix
/changelog
/subsection
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Vacation
To whom it may concern :) I'll be on vacation starting tomorrow for two weeks. If somebody really needs to contact me I can be reached at: +385.91.885.1068 Regards, Mladen. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36271] New: - response.sendRedirect() needs additional Permissions
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36271. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36271 Summary: response.sendRedirect() needs additional Permissions Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.9 Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Running tomcat with security manager 'response.sendRedirect(some address)' will cause following exception: java.security.AccessControlException: access denied (java.lang.RuntimePermission accessClassInPackage.org.apache.tomcat.util.net) at java.security.AccessControlContext.checkPermission(AccessControlContext.java:264) at java.security.AccessController.checkPermission(AccessController.java:427) at java.lang.SecurityManager.checkPermission(SecurityManager.java:532) at java.lang.SecurityManager.checkPackageAccess(SecurityManager.java:1512) at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:265) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:299) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:299) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:251) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClassInternal(ClassLoader.java:319) at org.apache.catalina.connector.Response.hasScheme(Response.java:1504) at org.apache.catalina.connector.Response.toAbsolute(Response.java:1431) at org.apache.catalina.connector.Response.sendRedirect(Response.java:1205) at org.apache.catalina.connector.ResponseFacade.sendRedirect(ResponseFacade.java:428) ... To work properly you have to add accessClassInPackage.org.apache.tomcat.util.net RuntimePermission. Using the core servlet api should not require that internal tomcat packages have to be exposed to the webapp. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35033] - response.encodeURL() needs additional Permissions
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35033. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35033 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 11:45 --- *** Bug 36271 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36271] - response.sendRedirect() needs additional Permissions
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36271. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36271 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 11:45 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 35033 *** -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
Mark Thomas wrote: Not having been around when we have done this before, do we just branch the previous version? If so, the simplest thing to do would be to create 5.5.x branches for each component and develop 6.0 (assuming we call it that) in trunk. I can do this as soon as we are ready. Yes, it has to be called 6.0 because of the new specifications release. Given the said specification schedule, I don't see anything new being included (besides code cleanup thanks to the mandated Java 5 support) unless components get donated or something. Rémy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cvs commit: jakarta-tomcat-5 build.properties.default
remm2005/08/19 06:00:43
Modified:.build.properties.default
Log:
- Revert to NSIS 2.0: NSIS 2.0.8 matches files differently (I think in a
broken
way) and the release contents are messed up.
- Upgrading to a new NSIS 2.0.x will need some effort (after 3 hours, I can't
quite figure how the new one matches stuff: for example File /r server\lib
will cause server\webapps\admin\WEB-INF\lib).
Revision ChangesPath
1.158 +4 -4 jakarta-tomcat-5/build.properties.default
Index: build.properties.default
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-tomcat-5/build.properties.default,v
retrieving revision 1.157
retrieving revision 1.158
diff -u -r1.157 -r1.158
--- build.properties.default 2 Aug 2005 19:08:07 - 1.157
+++ build.properties.default 19 Aug 2005 13:00:43 - 1.158
@@ -216,12 +216,12 @@
# - NSIS, version 2.0 or later -
-nsis.home=${base.path}/nsis-2.08
+nsis.home=${base.path}/nsis-2.0
nsis.exe=${nsis.home}/makensis.exe
nsis.installoptions.dll=${nsis.home}/Plugins/InstallOptions.dll
nsis.nsexec.dll=${nsis.home}/Plugins/nsExec.dll
-nsis.nsisdl.dll=${nsis.home}/Plugins/NSISdl.dll
-nsis.loc=${base-sf.loc}/nsis/nsis-2.08.exe
+nsis.nsisdl.dll=${nsis.home}/Plugins/nsisdl.dll
+nsis.loc=${base-sf.loc}/nsis/nsis-2.0.exe
# - Struts, version 1.2.4 or later -
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36275] New: - JSP TAG Markup Character Entities attr=lt;amp;quot;gt; passed into API badly
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36275. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36275 Summary: JSP TAG Markup Character Entities attr=lt;amp;quot;gt; passed into API badly Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.5.9 Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Jasper AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Originally posted to tomcat-users to question is this is my understanding of a BUG. The following example JSP page seems to be interpreted incorrectly by the time the attribute values are passed into a setDynamicAttribute() API call. %@ page language=java contentType=text/html; charset=UTF-8 pageEncoding=UTF-8% !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN %@ taglib prefix=g uri=http://domain.com/taglibs/generic-0.1; % html head titleTAG GENERIC PAGE/title /head body g:generic attrOne=1 attrTwo=2 attrThree=lt;amp;quot;gt; attrFour=quot;/lt; lt;Tag Herebr/ /body /html logged calls to setDynamicAttribute() showing the 3 arguments passed. DEBUG 10:22:40,279 (GenericTag.java:setDynamicAttribute:47) -null attrOne 1 DEBUG 10:22:40,285 (GenericTag.java:setDynamicAttribute:47) -null attrTwo 2 DEBUG 10:22:40,287 (GenericTag.java:setDynamicAttribute:47) -null attrThree lt;amp;gt; DEBUG 10:22:40,298 (GenericTag.java:setDynamicAttribute:47) -null attrFour It seems the quot; is correctly converted into but other character entities are not. It is my understanding that all markup file parsing should follow through the order of: * characterize file from its encoding type (UTF-8, etc...) * tokenize character stream looking for character entities and substitute what they represent (no matter where they are in the file), any substituted character may not be used as tokens that delimit markup elements in the next step * now parse the markup in the resulting file For performance reasons it probably doesn't happen exactly like that. I am expecting output like: null attrThree null attrFour I also notice that it seems common place to use JSP tags like this: img height=10 src=foo:tag name=value/ width=10/ Is the above recursivly reliable like this: x:outer attr=x:middle attr=x:inner attr=foo/// A pureist representation of the same that would be recursivly reliable may look something like this: merge:img merge:attr height=10/ merge:attr-body name=srcfoo:tag name=value//merge:attr-body merge:attr width=10/ /merge:img I appreciate the former maybe done as lazy short hand, but it appears to break something else which is a stronger binding standard. There must be many possible alternative approaches in JSP to this problem that won't conflict with other elements of all the standards that come info play. Is it possible to force a purist approach to this problem and switch off this mode to get back a reliable behaviour (even if it does seem like I have to take the long way around) call this idealized behaviour if you will. Ultimatly our JSP authoring tools will be powerful enough to automatically hide complex tag constructs like this and allow us to see at a glance the representation we most like to see but really whats saved in the raw file maybe the unrolled purist version. -- Darryl L. Miles -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36275] - JSP TAG Markup Character Entities attr=lt;amp;quot;gt; passed into API badly
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36275. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36275 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 19:51 --- Section 1.6 of the JSP spec states that only quot; (and apos;) are recognized as escapes in Tag attribute values when using the JSP syntax. It sounds like what you really want is to use JSP Documents (aka XML syntax). This will solve your problem of unparsed entities, as well as faulting using the output of Tags as HTML attribute values. You can specify this in the jsp- property-group element in your web.xml file. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36281] New: - problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281 Summary: problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.0.30 Platform: Sun OS/Version: Solaris Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Native:JK AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache 1.3.33 Tomcat 5.0.30 mod_jk 1.2.14 Solaris 9 Hi, There seems to be a problem in supporting Failover of a failed Tomcat server on Solaris 9 with mod_jk 1.2.14. When I simulate the failed Tomcat server by pulling the network cable, the worker will do all the appropriate socket_timeouts and retries, but when that fails, as it should, another worker is not chosen, and the failed worker is not put in_error. Here is a snippet from the log: [trace] service::jk_lb_worker.c (551): enter [trace] get_most_suitable_worker::jk_lb_worker.c (453): enter [debug] get_most_suitable_worker::jk_lb_worker.c (539): found best worker (giraffe) using by request method [trace] get_most_suitable_worker::jk_lb_worker.c (543): exit [debug] service::jk_lb_worker.c (587): service worker=giraffe jvm_route=giraffe [trace] ajp_service::jk_ajp_common.c (1630): enter [debug] ajp_service::jk_ajp_common.c (1670): processing with 3 retries [info] ajp_service::jk_ajp_common.c (1749): Sending request to tomcat failed, recoverable operation attempt=1 [info] ajp_service::jk_ajp_common.c (1749): Sending request to tomcat failed, recoverable operation attempt=2 [info] ajp_service::jk_ajp_common.c (1749): Sending request to tomcat failed, recoverable operation attempt=3 [error] ajp_service::jk_ajp_common.c (1758): Error connecting to tomcat. Tomcat is probably not started or is listening on the wrong port. worker=giraffe failed [trace] ajp_service::jk_ajp_common.c (1768): exit log ends The ajp_service::jk_ajp_common.c method is called by the service::jk_lb_worker.c method, but there are no more log messages after ajp_service returns. We should at least see an exit trace log for the service method. I put in logging statements in the code, and found the offending lines. From jk_lb_worker.c ln. 603-607: service_stat = end-service(end, s, l, is_service_error); /* IT IS ONE OF THESE TWO LINES THAT CAUSES THE THREAD TO DIE OR HANG */ rec-s-readed += end-rd; rec-s-transferred += end-wr; end-done(end, l); A logging message directly after the end-service method is called is seen, but one right before the end-done method is called is not. In any case, if I comment out the two lines that update the shared memory, everything works as expected. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36281] - problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 21:09 --- Created an attachment (id=16117) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16117action=view) A full log file showing one failed request -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36281] - problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 21:33 --- I would like to see your workers.properties and the Jk directives in your httpd configuration. Also: Could you please check, if the failing Apache child processes are still there, or if they died? The log chows the PID of the relevant process directly behind the date. If the process is still there, you can use /usr/proc/bin/pstack PID to write a thrad dump. That way we can confirm, in which function the hanging process sits. You could attach the pstack. If the process is not there any more, it might have crashed. In case you succeed in dumping a core file of the process, you can again use pstack on that core file. Finally it might be interesting to use truss (or if you are already familiar with it dtrace) to find out, if the error is related to some system call. Configure apache to only use very few children (like startng 2 servers and having sparemax and min also equals to 2). Start the server via truss -f -o some_output_file -w all -r all -v all \ /usr/local/apache/bin/apachectl start and then redo your tests (apache will be a little slow). The file some_output_file contains information about all system calls, about bytes read and written, signals received, errnos etc. To have a somewhat easier test case: In the log you attached one can see, that the working request for the html produces to image requests going to two apache processes in parallel which both fail. I ould be a simpler retest to only use single requests, not something in parallel, e.g. not automatically reloading embedded objevcts via the browser. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36281] - problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 22:21 --- Created an attachment (id=16119) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16119action=view) workers.properties -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36281] - problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 22:22 --- Created an attachment (id=16120) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16120action=view) Mod_jk configuration file -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36281] - problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 22:24 --- The pstack returned nothing, and I confirmed by watching TOP that the process is created then dies when the http request is over. I am having trouble running truss, I'll get back to you with that when I can. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 22:25 --- Created an attachment (id=16121) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16121action=view) modified Options targeted at jasper performance improvement -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 22:32 --- Created an attachment (id=16122) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16122action=view) modified JspC targeted at jasper performance improvement -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 22:37 --- Created an attachment (id=16123) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16123action=view) modified EmbeddedServletOptions targeted at jasper performance improvement -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 22:38 --- Created an attachment (id=16124) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16124action=view) modified TagLibraryInfoImpl targeted at jasper performance improvement -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 22:55 --- (In reply to comment #17) Created an attachment (id=16121) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16121action=view) [edit] modified Options targeted at jasper performance improvement You should submit patches in diff format (cvs diff). It's too difficult to evaluate the patch when you just post the entire modified file. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31269] - Configuration for Java 1.5 is too hairy
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31269. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31269 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 23:32 --- In addition to the suggested configuration changes, I also had to add another init parameter in web.xml: init-param param-namecompilerSourceVM/param-name param-value1.5/param-value /init-param I like using Java 1.5 and scriptlets and suggest that this somehow be made easier to use. Perhaps the default compiler target and source VMs could be the same as the JVM that is running Tomcat. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36281] - problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-19 23:43 --- Config is pretty basic and looks OK. The process dead is strange and I don't see an immediate reason for it. It would be good, if you could reproduce it with without parallel requests to simplify the situation. Did you build apache and mod_jk yourself? Have they been compiled using the same compiler and the same CFLAGS? -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36281] - problem with Failover in jk_lb_worker.c
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36281 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-20 01:28 --- Sorry for all this. We were building on a seperate machine using the gcc compiler, because our primary Sun build machine wasnt working at the time. Now it is and I recompiled on it, and everything is hunkey-dorey now. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
On 8/17/05, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Assuming everyone else is happy to move the remaining tomcat modules to SVN I would suggest the following stages (Watchdog was stage 1). I'll give people at least a week to comment on this proposal and assuming no -1's start the phase 2 towards the end of next week. 2. j-t-service, j-t-site 3. j-servletapi, j-servletapi-4, j-servletapi-5 4. j-tomcat, j-tomcat-4.0 5. j-t-catalina, j-t-5, j-t-jasper, j-t-connectors Any other comments/concerns? I have jakarta-tools down as a Tomcat CVS module, though looking at it seems to indicate that it is very dead, not edited for 5 years. Still, the tags are all TOMCAT_3_1 based, so I figure you guys get to decide what to do with it: * Somehow come over to SVN because Tomcat-3's tags will need it to build(?). * Put into the pot for archiving (http://www.apache.org/dev/drafts/subversion-migration-plan.txt) Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subversion migration update
- Original Message - From: Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tomcat Developers List tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 5:37 PM Subject: Re: Subversion migration update On 8/17/05, Mark Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Assuming everyone else is happy to move the remaining tomcat modules to SVN I would suggest the following stages (Watchdog was stage 1). I'll give people at least a week to comment on this proposal and assuming no -1's start the phase 2 towards the end of next week. 2. j-t-service, j-t-site 3. j-servletapi, j-servletapi-4, j-servletapi-5 4. j-tomcat, j-tomcat-4.0 5. j-t-catalina, j-t-5, j-t-jasper, j-t-connectors Any other comments/concerns? I have jakarta-tools down as a Tomcat CVS module, though looking at it seems to indicate that it is very dead, not edited for 5 years. Yup, it's a dodo ;-). Still, the tags are all TOMCAT_3_1 based, so I figure you guys get to decide what to do with it: * Somehow come over to SVN because Tomcat-3's tags will need it to build(?). * Put into the pot for archiving (http://www.apache.org/dev/drafts/subversion-migration-plan.txt) It's needed for Watchdog, but not Tomcat. My vote is to archive it, since it is extremely unlikely that it will ever come to life ever again. Hen This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of this message and any attachments. In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Bünermann/HBF/Minden/kampa/DE ist außer Haus .
Ich werde ab 19.08.2005 nicht im Büro sein. Ich kehre zurück am 31.08.2005. Ich werde Ihre Nachricht nach meiner Rückkehr beantworten. In dringenden Fällen wenden Sie sich bitte Herrn Bagehorn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). Herr Bagehorn hat die Rufnummer 0571/93425-80) In ganz dringenden Fällen hinterlassen Sie bitte eine Nachricht auf meiner Mobilbox unter der Funk-Rufnummer: 0171/99 33 525.
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-20 04:12 --- (In reply to comment #21) (In reply to comment #17) Created an attachment (id=16121) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16121action=view) [edit] [edit] modified Options targeted at jasper performance improvement You should submit patches in diff format (cvs diff). It's too difficult to evaluate the patch when you just post the entire modified file. Thank you. I will replace the format. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #16121|0 |1 is obsolete|| Attachment #16122|0 |1 is obsolete|| Attachment #16123|0 |1 is obsolete|| Attachment #16124|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-20 04:18 --- Created an attachment (id=16126) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16126action=view) proposed patches for Options.java, JspC.java, EmbeddedServletOptions.java and TagLibraryInfoImpl.java in cvs diff format This patch is about caching the TreeNode tld in TagLibraryInfoImpl. Because the profiling results show the repeating parsing of the same TLD has dominated the precompilation process, this change would make the jasper works much better on a large Ant build :-) (I would also submit the different profiling snapshots before and after the code changes). Here is what I basically did: 1. Options.java: add two public functions in Options interface. One is isCacheTldXml(), and the other is Map getCachedTldXmlMap(). The parsed TLD XML data is cached in a Map(String uri, TreeNode tld). 2. JspC.java: add switch -cacheTldXml and implement the two functions defined in Options. The cacheTldXml is defaulted to true but the users can set it. 3. EmbeddedServletOptions.java: add boolean cacheTldXml and implement the two functions. As EmbeddedServletOptions is called by run-time compilation, cacheTldXml is set to false by default. 4. TagLibraryInfoImpl.java: add an if-else clause in parseTld to distinguish command-line build and run-time build. If the CompilerContext is JspC, try to get the TreeNode from cache first; otherwise call parseXMLDocument to parse the TLD directly. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-20 04:40 --- Created an attachment (id=16127) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16127action=view) cpu profiling snapshot by class (call tree) before the change The testbed is the Liferay Portal Source (www.liferay.com). It is a quite big and 464 Java source files would be created. The build machine is a typical Dell 4600 desktop with Fedora Core 4, 2.8GHz, 768M. Before the patch, the TagLibraryInfoImpl class takes more than 50% CPU time. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 33650] - Jasper performance for multiple files processing
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33650 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-20 04:46 --- Created an attachment (id=16128) -- (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16128action=view) cpu profiling snapshot by class (call tree) after the change After the patch, the TagLibraryInfoImpl would take much less CPU time, less than 5%. As it's inconvenient to post the profiling snapshots here (one at a time), I would post the rest of them on my personal website to show the differences. I'll post the URL when it's done. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 36284] New: - External Entities cannot be found in web.xml
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36284. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36284 Summary: External Entities cannot be found in web.xml Product: Tomcat 5 Version: 5.0.28 Platform: Other OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: Catalina AssignedTo: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I am using JspC to generated my precompiled pages, but I do not like how I am forced to manually alter my web.xml. To get around this, I have declared an external entity reference in web.xml: ?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1? !DOCTYPE web-app [ !ENTITY foo SYSTEM generated_web.xml ] web-app xmlns=http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/j2ee;... version=2.4 When I reference the entity in the servlet section, I get an exception. Tomcat is trying to resolve to the boot directory, not the directory of my webapp. This is an obvious error: == java.io.FileNotFoundException: C:\jakarta-tomcat-5.0.28\bin\generated_web.xml (The system cannot find the file specified) at java.io.FileInputStream.open(Native Method) at java.io.FileInputStream.init(FileInputStream.java:106) at java.io.FileInputStream.init(FileInputStream.java:66) at sun.net.www.protocol.file.FileURLConnection.connect(FileURLConnection.java:69) at sun.net.www.protocol.file.FileURLConnection.getInputStream(FileURLConnection.java:156) at org.apache.xerces.impl.XMLEntityManager.setupCurrentEntity(Unknown Source) at org.apache.xerces.impl.XMLEntityManager.startEntity(Unknown Source) at org.apache.xerces.impl.XMLEntityManager.startEntity(Unknown Source) == The XML parser should have a pluggable entity resolver that maps to the web application directory being loaded. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
