DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUGĀ·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40151>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED ANDĀ·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40151





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-09-14 17:55 -------
First of all, your problem description is inconsistent. The details are 
important.

You gave an example URL without a config, and afterwards a config, but the
example URL does not fit to this config. So we have to guess, which URL you
really mean.

I canot reproduce the problem, and I do't understand why any config workaround
should be necessary.

I used Apache 2.2.3 with mod_jk 1.2.18 and the following configuration:

JkWorkersFile conf/workers.properties
JkShmFile run/mod_jk.shm
JkLogFile logs/mod_jk.log
JkLogLevel trace
JkMount / motorweb
JkMount /*.jsp motorweb

and in workers.properties:

worker.list=motorweb
worker.motorweb.host=mytchost
worker.motorweb.port=28313
worker.motorweb.type=ajp13

Then I added an index.jsp into the top level directory of the ROOT context and
send the following URL to apache:

'fraxinus:8080/;jsessionid=a'

And voila: it returned the correct index.jsp. The mod_jk log file correctly 
showed:

[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_map.c (481): enter
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_map.c (502): Removing Session path
';jsessionid=a' URI '/'
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_map.c (508): Attempting to map URI
'/;jsessionid=a' from 2 maps
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_map.c (520): Attempting to map context URI 
'/*.jsp'
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_map.c (520): Attempting to map context URI '/'
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_map.c (545): Found an exact match motorweb -> /
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_map.c (548): exit
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace] jk_handler::mod_jk.c (1778): 
enter
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug] jk_handler::mod_jk.c (1832):
Into handler jakarta-servlet worker=motorweb r->proxyreq=0
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace]
wc_get_worker_for_name::jk_worker.c (101): enter
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug]
wc_get_worker_for_name::jk_worker.c (111): found a worker motorweb
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace]
wc_get_worker_for_name::jk_worker.c (113): exit
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace] wc_maintain::jk_worker.c (287):
enter
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug] wc_maintain::jk_worker.c (301):
Maintaining worker motorweb
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace] ajp_maintain::jk_ajp_common.c
(2198): enter
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace] ajp_maintain::jk_ajp_common.c
(2206): exit
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [trace] wc_maintain::jk_worker.c (312): 
exit
[Thu Sep 14 19:50:15 2006] [5572:63840] [debug] init_ws_service::mod_jk.c (531):
Service protocol=HTTP/1.1 method=GET host=(null) addrr=192.168.0.69
name=fraxinus port=8080 auth=(null) user=(null) laddr=192.168.0.69
raddr=192.168.0.69

So if you can reproduce your problem, please describe correctly your config
including workers.properties, and your test case including expected and observed
behaviour. Finaly please attach the jk log file in trace level.

I keep this ticket as invalid as long as there is no other information 
available.

-- 
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]

Reply via email to