Filip,
Yes, That would be awesome.
 
Thanks,
Dan

        -----Original Message----- 
        From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
        Sent: Fri 3/11/2005 2:11 PM 
        To: Tomcat Users List 
        Cc: 
        Subject: Re: tomcat load-balancing maintenance strategy?
        
        

        its fixed in 5.5.x, you need a patch for 5.0.x?
        
        
        
        Dan Carwin wrote:
        
        >I also experienced cluster failure when restarting a downed cluster
        >member in 5.0.
        >I tested with Tomcat 5.0.30.
        >
        >Randall, what version of Tomcat did you succeed with?
        >
        >Thanks,
        >Dan
        >
        >-----Original Message-----
        >From: Richard Mixon (qwest) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
        >Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 10:45 AM
        >To: Tomcat Users List
        >Subject: RE: tomcat load-balancing maintenance strategy?
        >
        >
        >Jim,
        >
        >Also check the archives for my post on restarting a downed Tomcat
        >cluster member. This was not working well prior to Tomcat 5.5.8. When
        >the instance was restarted it would throw exceptions trying to
        >re-synchronize vi session replication.
        >
        > - Richard
        >
        >-----Original Message-----
        >From: Randall Svancara [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
        >Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 9:40 AM
        >To: Tomcat Users List
        >Subject: RE: tomcat load-balancing maintenance strategy?
        >
        >
        >You need to implement either in memory session replication or persist
        >the session in a database or a shared file system.
        >
        >I have finally got my tomcat cluster working and session replication is
        >functional.
        >
        >Randall
        >
        >---------------------------------------------------------------------
        >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
        >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
        >
        >
        > 
        >
        
        

Reply via email to