On 19.02.2009 13:55, mt...@apache.org wrote:
Author: mturk
Date: Thu Feb 19 12:55:05 2009
New Revision: 745842
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=745842&view=rev
Log:
Allow dynamic worker address change
Modified: tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/common/jk_ajp_common.c
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/common/jk_ajp_common.c?rev=745842&r1=745841&r2=745842&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/common/jk_ajp_common.c (original)
+++ tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/native/common/jk_ajp_common.c Thu Feb 19
12:55:05 2009
@@ -2167,6 +2167,18 @@
jk_shm_lock();
if (aw->sequence != aw->s->h.sequence)
jk_ajp_pull(aw, l);
+ if (aw->addr_sequence != aw->s->addr_sequence) {
+ aw->addr_sequence = aw->s->addr_sequence;
+ aw->host = aw->s->hostname;
Should we copy the string here?
+ aw->port = aw->s->port;
+ if (!jk_resolve(aw->host, aw->port,&aw->worker_inet_addr,
+ aw->worker.we->pool, l)) {
+ if (is_error)
+ *is_error = JK_HTTP_SERVER_ERROR;
i think we should log an error in this case and maybe also reset the
data to the previous working set.
+ JK_TRACE_EXIT(l);
+ return JK_FALSE;
+ }
+ }
jk_shm_unlock();
aw->s->used++;
@@ -2464,24 +2476,39 @@
ajp_worker_t *p = pThis->worker_private;
p->port = jk_get_worker_port(props, p->name, port);
p->host = jk_get_worker_host(props, p->name, host);
+ if (!p->host) {
+ p->host = "undefined";
+ }
Guess we don't need that, because jk_get_worker_host() already gets a
default as the last argument (usually localhost).
if (JK_IS_DEBUG_LEVEL(l))
jk_log(l, JK_LOG_DEBUG,
"worker %s contact is '%s:%d'",
p->name, p->host, p->port);
-
-/* XXX: Why do we only resolve, if port> 1024 ? */
+ /* Copy the contact to shm */
+ strncpy(p->s->hostname, p->host, JK_SHM_STR_SIZ);
+ p->s->port = p->port;
+ /* Resolve if port> 1024.
+ *
+ */
if (p->port> 1024) {
if (jk_resolve(p->host, p->port,&p->worker_inet_addr, we->pool,
l)) {
+ p->s->addr_sequence = p->addr_sequence = 1;
JK_TRACE_EXIT(l);
return JK_TRUE;
}
jk_log(l, JK_LOG_ERROR,
- "can't resolve tomcat address %s", p->host);
+ "worker %s can't resolve tomcat address %s",
+ p->name, p->host);
+ }
+ else {
+ p->s->port = p->port = 0;
+ if (JK_IS_DEBUG_LEVEL(l))
+ jk_log(l, JK_LOG_DEBUG,
+ "worker %s contact is disabled",
+ p->name, p->host, p->port);
+ JK_TRACE_EXIT(l);
+ return JK_TRUE;
}
- jk_log(l, JK_LOG_ERROR,
- "invalid host and port %s %d",
- ((p->host == NULL) ? "NULL" : p->host), p->port);
It was an error log message, now it is debug. Why don't we simpy allow
ports below 1024?
Regards,
Rainer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
