Re: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects in Apache2/mod_perl2
French, Shawn wrote: > Stas Bekman wrote: > >>It seems that you are after the same functionality as Apache::DBI, you >>want a pool of items that you want to be able to choose from. >>Look for threads::shared (perl 5.8.0), just create a shared hash with >>keys that you use for the map and the values for the actual connection > > objects. > > YES!!! That is exactly what I need! Where do I find perl 5.8.0 and > threads::shared? I need a perl binary for windows since I'm without a > compiler... Wait about one more week and it's going to be released. e.g. see http://use.perl.org/ > As for the apache notes, I hope your right that it would be easy to > implement, otherwise I can't upgrade to apache2 without some _huge_ > workarounds... which are always nice to avoid :) Apache 2.0 wasn't released yet in any case. __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH --> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
RE: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects in Apache2/mod_perl2
Stas Bekman wrote: > It seems that you are after the same functionality as Apache::DBI, you > want a pool of items that you want to be able to choose from. > Look for threads::shared (perl 5.8.0), just create a shared hash with > keys that you use for the map and the values for the actual connection objects. YES!!! That is exactly what I need! Where do I find perl 5.8.0 and threads::shared? I need a perl binary for windows since I'm without a compiler... As for the apache notes, I hope your right that it would be easy to implement, otherwise I can't upgrade to apache2 without some _huge_ workarounds... which are always nice to avoid :) Shawn
Re: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects in Apache2/mod_perl2
French, Shawn wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> It's me again... the persistent telnet mod_perl newbie!
> (http://msgs.securepoint.com/cgi-bin/get/apache0205/204.html)
>
> I have implemented my project using persistent telnet connections (one for
> each user session accessible throught the session to perform various
> functions through telnet) on win2000:
> Apache/1.3.26 (Win32) mod_perl/1.27_01-dev
>
> Now for my next trick!
> When I started I didn't realize that mod_perl on win32 could only handle one
> request at a time!!! This is obviously not acceptable for deployment.
>
> So, I would like to upgrade to Apache2/mod_perl2 to take advantage of the
> multi-process mod_perl model that the _very_ kind Randy Kobes told me about
> (http://groups.google.ca/groups?dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=afv3gu%
> 24qt2%242%40canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca). However, with a multi-process model,
> I'm not sure how I will be able to keep a user's telnet-session-object
> accessible throughout multiple requests. Currently it's not a problem since
> there's only one process for ALL mod_perl requests. In Apache2/mod_perl2
> there will be more than one process so I need some sort of mapping to make
> sure my clients are aways served by the same process. Is this possible? Am I
> in way over my head (again!!) ?
It seems that you are after the same functionality as Apache::DBI, you
want a pool of items that you want to be able to choose from. Look for
threads::shared (perl 5.8.0), just create a shared hash with keys that
you use for the map and the values for the actual connection objects.
If you can have the client persist the connection, you can implement a
real protocol module. e.g., see:
http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/user/handlers/handlers.html#PerlProcessConnectionHandler
> Another problem is that I have also been informed that my _MUCH_ used
> apache_notes function in php will not be available to me in Apache2
> (http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=17557). I realize this is an Apache2 thing,
> but I was wondering if anyone here knows of a workaround that will allow my
> php scripts to communicate with mod_perl (and vice-versa) until (hopefully)
> the function is ported to Apache2.
From what I understood mod_php in 2.0 is going to be implemented as a
filter. Is that right? Is that the reason why notes won't work anymore?
I don't think so. Practically there should be a problem to implement
this feature, because you have a connection object which persists for
the whole connection, so you should be able to register some data in
this object and then retrieve it later in some other phase/filter.
in mod_perl handler you simply get the connectin object and stick
something into the notes, e.g. inside request handlers:
my $r = shift;
my $c = $r->connection;
$c->notes->set(mod_perl => 'rules');
and then later for example in a mod_perl filter handler you do:
my $f = shift;
my $c = $f->connection;
my $is = $c->notes->get("mod_perl");
$f->print("mod_perl $is");
you should ask php folks why cannot they get c->notes working, the C
datastructure is all there waiting to be used.
__
Stas BekmanJAm_pH --> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
French, Shawn wrote: > Recall that I am using: Apache/1.3.20 (Win32) mod_perl/1.25_01-dev > mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6a on Windows 2000 with PHP 4.21 > > Would this be why my scripts are working? Mystery solved! Yes, that's why. You are running mod_perl in single process mode because you're on Windows, so only one request is handled at a time. That means that every user will always return to the same Apache process, since there is only one of them! > Does this mean that as long as I > stay with windows I will be alright? For certan definitions of alright, yes. It won't be speedy if you start getting many concurrent requests. - Perrin
Re: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
"French, Shawn" wrote: > > I just found this: http://www.devshed.com/Talk/Books/ProApache/page2.html > > "On Windows platforms, Apache does not fork; consequently, the directives > for controlling the number of processes or their lifetime have no effect. > Instead, Apache runs as a multi-threaded process" > > Recall that I am using: Apache/1.3.20 (Win32) mod_perl/1.25_01-dev > mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6a on Windows 2000 with PHP 4.21 > > Would this be why my scripts are working? Does this mean that as long as I > stay with windows I will be alright? > I'm guessing that it has more to do with having "KeepAlive On" (in httpd.conf) and a client that supports HTTP 1.1. For a test, try "KeepAlive Off", or use a client that doesn't support HTTP 1.1 (Netscape 4.x, for example).
RE: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
It it possible that KeepAlives are what's making this work? If the user is active enough, in theory, they would always be connected to the same httpd process... Jim -- James Helm - Solaris System Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] WNS National Operations - Core Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] AT&T Wireless Services Inc. (425) 288-4395 (Desk) 3555 Monte Villa Pkwy, Bothell, WA 98021 (206) 618-0438 (Cell) > -Original Message- > From: French, Shawn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 1:50 PM > To: 'Perrin Harkins' > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects > > > Perrin wrote: > > I can't see how it could be working now > > That makes two of us! > > > You're probably opening new telnet connections from each apache > > process. > > I know that I am not since they are continuing to log to the > same dump file, and my code (as stated in previous message) > simply goes to the hash and takes the object. > > > That won't work, since you can't control which process will handle > > requests from the client. > > OK, is there a way to make sure that there is just one > process? This site is not for milions of users, only 10 - 20. > > I'm sure that others have had to keep persistent sockets > and/or filehandles on their server, and I really don't see > how my problem is any different... > > Please, can anybody help me? > Shawn >
RE: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
I just found this: http://www.devshed.com/Talk/Books/ProApache/page2.html "On Windows platforms, Apache does not fork; consequently, the directives for controlling the number of processes or their lifetime have no effect. Instead, Apache runs as a multi-threaded process" Recall that I am using: Apache/1.3.20 (Win32) mod_perl/1.25_01-dev mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6a on Windows 2000 with PHP 4.21 Would this be why my scripts are working? Does this mean that as long as I stay with windows I will be alright? I realize (as Medi Montaseri pointed out) that my scripts might not be too secure (ie. hijacking a telnet session) however I am only concerned about getting this working, and making sure it will remain working, as it will be run behind a firewall in a corporate intranet. For now I will continue coding with my current architecture hoping that the above mentioned information is correct. Thanks for all the help! Shawn
Re: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
Perhaps you can put a System V message Queue in front of both Telnet
connections, this way producers can place their messages in the queue
asynchronously , and the backend (consumer) can pick them up in a FIFO.
Also, try using Net::SSH::Perl. The Net::Telnet does not give your things
like
STDOUT, vs STDERR, vs Exit code. Net::Telnet puts everything in one
channel.
The Security is yet another issue, specially when the session could
be open
and idle for exessive amount of time. Your session can be hijacked
easily.
"French, Shawn" wrote:
Vitals:
Apache/1.3.20 (Win32) mod_perl/1.25_01-dev mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6a
on
Windows 2000 with PHP 4.21
I am working on a project that requires me to have two telnet objects
per
user session opened, and accessible throughout the user's session.
I have
looked at Apache::Session and many other solutions but my problem is
that to
keep a Net::Telnet object, I need to keep open sockets and filehandles,
so I
cannot serialize the object and store it in a database or file.
Currently I have similar code working flawlessly:
###
# "startup.pl" - called when apache starts (ie. PerlRequire
"d:/Apache/conf/startup.pl")
##
use MySite::Session;
###
# "Session.pm"
##
@EXPORT = qw( %sessionHash );
our %sessionHash;
###
# "init_session.pl" - called IN MOD_PERL when a new session is requested
##
use MySite::Session;
$sessionHash{$session_id . "_telnetObj"} = Net::Telnet->new();
###
# "dostuff.pl" - called IN MOD_PERL many time throughout the session
##
use MySite::Session;
my telnetObj = $sessionHash{$session_id . "_telnetObj"};
bless (\$telnetObj, "Net::Telnet");
Although this is working right now, I don't know enough [ anything?
:) ]
about Apache or mod_perl to be sure that this will work in the future.
What
I am really concerned about is that the telnetObj will only be accessible
from scripts run by the same child process as that which created and
saved
it.
Is there a better way to do this?
Thanks,
Shawn French
--
-
Medi Montaseri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unix Distributed Systems Engineer HTTP://www.CyberShell.com
CyberShell Engineering
-
Re: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
Our project needed persistent socket connections open as well. There is
supposed to be a standard mechanism to pass file descriptors between unix
processes, though it's bugginess level depends on your OS. There is a perl
module for this called Socket::PassAccessRights. So what you can do is
create a daemon process that just hangs round holding socket connections
open, like a socket cache basically, and passing them back and forth between
Apache processes based on some session ID or user ID or the like.
Your daemon ends up looking something like this (with lots more error
checking of course)
my %sockmap;
while (1) {
my $clientsock = $listen->accept();
chomp(my $sessionid = <$clientsock>);
my $cachesock = ($sockmap{$sessionid} ||= opennewsock());
Socket::PassAccessRights::sendfd(fileno($clientsock), fileno($cachesock));
$clientsock->close();
}
And in your mod_perl code you do something like:
my $serversock = IO::Socket::INET->new(Server => 'localhost', Port =>
SOCKETPOOLPORT);
print $serversock $sessionid, "\n";
my $Fd = Socket::PassAccessRights::recvfd(fileno($serversock));
open(my $realsocket, "<&=$Fd");
fcntl($realsocket, F_SETFD, 0);
my $ofh = select($realsocket); $| = 1; select ($ofh);
If you do some experimenting, you'll get something that works, you'll also
find lots of cases that don't.
Rob
- Original Message -
From: "French, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 3:53 AM
Subject: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
> Vitals:
> Apache/1.3.20 (Win32) mod_perl/1.25_01-dev mod_ssl/2.8.4 OpenSSL/0.9.6a on
> Windows 2000 with PHP 4.21
>
> I am working on a project that requires me to have two telnet objects per
> user session opened, and accessible throughout the user's session. I have
> looked at Apache::Session and many other solutions but my problem is that
to
> keep a Net::Telnet object, I need to keep open sockets and filehandles, so
I
> cannot serialize the object and store it in a database or file.
>
> Currently I have similar code working flawlessly:
> ###
> # "startup.pl" - called when apache starts (ie. PerlRequire
> "d:/Apache/conf/startup.pl")
> ##
> use MySite::Session;
>
> ###
> # "Session.pm"
> ##
> @EXPORT = qw( %sessionHash );
> our %sessionHash;
>
> ###
> # "init_session.pl" - called IN MOD_PERL when a new session is requested
> ##
> use MySite::Session;
> $sessionHash{$session_id . "_telnetObj"} = Net::Telnet->new();
>
> ###
> # "dostuff.pl" - called IN MOD_PERL many time throughout the session
> ##
> use MySite::Session;
> my telnetObj = $sessionHash{$session_id . "_telnetObj"};
> bless (\$telnetObj, "Net::Telnet");
>
> Although this is working right now, I don't know enough [ anything? :) ]
> about Apache or mod_perl to be sure that this will work in the future.
What
> I am really concerned about is that the telnetObj will only be accessible
> from scripts run by the same child process as that which created and saved
> it.
>
> Is there a better way to do this?
>
> Thanks,
> Shawn French
>
>
RE: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
Maybe you can tell us more about the project (e.g. why telnet ?) so there will come many bad advices ? :-) Peter Bi > Perrin wrote: > > I can't see how it could be working now > > That makes two of us! > > > You're probably opening new telnet connections from each apache process. > > I know that I am not since they are continuing to log to the same dump file, > and my code (as stated in previous message) simply goes to the hash and > takes the object. > > > That won't work, since you can't control which process will handle > > requests from the client. > > OK, is there a way to make sure that there is just one process? This site is > not for milions of users, only 10 - 20. > > I'm sure that others have had to keep persistent sockets and/or filehandles > on their server, and I really don't see how my problem is any different... > > Please, can anybody help me? > Shawn
RE: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
Perrin wrote: > I can't see how it could be working now That makes two of us! > You're probably opening new telnet connections from each apache process. I know that I am not since they are continuing to log to the same dump file, and my code (as stated in previous message) simply goes to the hash and takes the object. > That won't work, since you can't control which process will handle > requests from the client. OK, is there a way to make sure that there is just one process? This site is not for milions of users, only 10 - 20. I'm sure that others have had to keep persistent sockets and/or filehandles on their server, and I really don't see how my problem is any different... Please, can anybody help me? Shawn
Re: Persistent Net::Telnet Objects
French, Shawn wrote: > Although this is working right now, I don't know enough [ anything? :) ] > about Apache or mod_perl to be sure that this will work in the future. I can't see how it could be working now, unless it is actually creating a new Telnet object on every request. Your %sessionHash is not shared between processes and you have no control over which process will handle any request. You're probably opening new telnet connections from each apache process. > What > I am really concerned about is that the telnetObj will only be accessible > from scripts run by the same child process as that which created and saved > it. That won't work, since you can't control which process will handle requests from the client. > Is there a better way to do this? You could write a web server in Perl, which would run a separate persistent process for each client on a different port. Randal wrote a column about that: http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/WebTechniques/col23.html You could also use this technique to make a sort of telnet server, and hide that server behind Apache/mod_perl, i.e. clients talk to mod_perl which talks to the telnet server. Of course the simplest approach would be to just let each Apache process open telnet sessions as needed. - Perrin
