Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
In regard to our caching discussion, Frank, I think you will like the following article. The prior article about two essential filters is interesting too. http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2004/03/03/filters.html?page=1 One thing seems certain: there is complete serverside cache control. -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. Heaven has changed. The Sky now goes all the way to our feet. ~Dakota Jack~ This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
snip I suspect that it is relatively small and, when you introduce sophisticated state and caching options, it may be faster. Relative to what? To the web server dealing with it? I would suspect it's actually relatively BIG compared to that. I'm certainly willing to be proved wrong though. /snip As we agree, we just need to get the data. I think there should be a lot of standard testing out there that is more reliable than I am probably going to do off the top. I will look around a bit and maybe someone will chime in with some help here. snip That might be true... one other point to remember though is that the more unusual things you do, the harder it will be to get people able to maintain it. I fight standards at work as much as the next guy just because creative people don't like standards forced on them, but clever solutions usual equal difficult to maintain solutions. I don't think I'm telling you something you don't know :) But, that's not my argument, so don't spend any time on it. Just another side track we could go down :) /snip I am 100% in favor of keeping maintenance low. That was my original primary objective going here. I could not believe how much time was being spent on URLs, base tags, etc., etc., with all the concomittant confusion throughout the development process. snip I think the bigger hit is reading the danged thing. This obviously is especially so when there is an ongoing use of changing the JSP page. This has no penalty with ProtocolPages. /snip I just mean the more complicated parsing rules that go with JSP, as well as everything else. snip That's what I like, woman that are easy to please :) (You were left SO wide open there I just couldn't resist!) /snip Heh, heh! Remind me never to fence with you, Frank. Actually, and this is really off topic, in my milieu I am dearly loved because I have really learned how to be a friend, husband, etc. This has been the largest accomplishment by far in my life and the one I most cherish. snip * (Does the app server pass the response back to the web server to serve, or does it serve it directly to the client at that point? I'm actually not sure, but let's be optimistic and say the web server is out of the equation at this point, although I suspect that's NOT the case) In any case, images are returned to client- /snip I think that the ResourceAction class actually acts as the web server and that is why the return is null. The class writes to the responses output stream and that is all the server does, right? FileInputStream fis = new FileInputStream(fileName); BufferedInputStream bis = new BufferedInputStream(fis); byte[] bytes = new byte[bis.available()]; OutputStreamos= response.getOutputStream(); bis.read(bytes); os.write(bytes); os.flush(); os.close(); snip There is clearly more work done with the second chart because the app server is now involved. How costly is all that work? /snip Again, I am not sure about this, and it is the sort of thing that one typically makes mistakes about if one does not go by the data. So, I am going to hold judgment on it, but my intuitions are not running in the same direction as yours. I keep remembering how the following of good OOP principles can make Java applications faster that C applications doing the exact same thing, although most think that would not be the case. Just the other day I was reading about a guy who tried and failed to do some imaging work in early Java and had to go to C. Now Java is faster in that area. snip You could make the argument that because any servlet-based application is incurring those costs with most requests, what's the big deal about adding a few more? To a degree that would be a reasonable argument, but scalability is most certainly at risk because viewed from the point of view of the app server, a single page really corresponds to 10 app server requests. /snip I think there are trade-offs that will need to be measured. For example, I can envision with some of the stuff I do creating whole pages dynamically with images. The new Java imaging stuff is really, really, cool on this. Flash has its side too. snip Even if it's all done in the most efficient way, those ten requests look, for all intents and purposes, like 10 simultaneous USERS (assuming 1 request per user). So, maybe your app server can handle 100 concurrent requests... If the web server was allowed to serve the images, your app server still has 100 slots available to service requests, which corresponds generally to 100 concurrent users... If it's serving 10 images for each physical user though, now you can only service 10 concurrent users, so you've reduced your overall server capacity (as viewed by outside clients) by 90%. Ouch. /snip Now just one moment, Bub! LOL ;-) You really are not seeing the ways you can save time here. For
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
I think the worst case is 22 versus 32, Frank. with 10 images. See your note and then my reasoning below that. snip Even if it's all done in the most efficient way, those ten requests look, for all intents and purposes, like 10 simultaneous USERS (assuming 1 request per user). So, maybe your app server can handle 100 concurrent requests... If the web server was allowed to serve the images, your app server still has 100 slots available to service requests, which corresponds generally to 100 concurrent users... If it's serving 10 images for each physical user though, now you can only service 10 concurrent users, so you've reduced your overall server capacity (as viewed by outside clients) by 90%. Ouch. I fully acknowledge those are rough, worst-case numbers... I certainly don't mean to imply that your approach is 90% worse. Not at all! Just trying to illustrate the problem, as I see it, in certain environments. /snip app server = (AS) struts server = (SS) req = request -- = pass res = response With ResourceAction ___ First case HTML = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 Second image JPEG (say) = req (AS) -- res (SS) = 3 . Tenth image JPEG (say) = req (AS) -- res (SS) = 3 WIthout ResourceAction ___ First case HTML = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 First image JPEG (say) = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 Second image JPEG (say) = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 . Tenth image JPEG (say) = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 This is 22 versus 32. Apparently you forgot (I think?) that the app server has to handle ten images too. They don't just go out with the page, although we are looking at this in a very oversimplified sense. There is no question that the AS is quicker with HTML than the SS, but I am not so sure about the images. The SS may be faster. There is lots of room here for tuning. -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. We are poor . . . but we are free. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
Dakota Jack wrote: I just mean the more complicated parsing rules that go with JSP, as well as everything else. Ok, gotcha. But, this only applies for the first access to the JSP, right? From then on it's a servlet invocation (which is more expensive than returning just a plain'old HTML document, right? But now I am splitting hairs) Heh, heh! Remind me never to fence with you, Frank. Actually, and this is really off topic, in my milieu I am dearly loved because I have really learned how to be a friend, husband, etc. This has been the largest accomplishment by far in my life and the one I most cherish. That's all that counts in the end. I have a wife of ten years and two great kids (well, most of the time they are great anyway), and although I have to remind myself of it sometimes because I get so wrapped up in other things that aren't as important, they are without a doubt my greatest accomplishment. I think that the ResourceAction class actually acts as the web server and that is why the return is null. The class writes to the responses output stream and that is all the server does, right? I thought so too at first, but upon further reflection I'm not so sure... If a request comes in to the web server and then it forwards it on to the app server, that would mean at some very low level that the web server was passing along the connection to the app server... I'm not so sure it's anything that complex... It may be that the app server renders the response stream, but then passes it back to the web server to return to the client. The bottom line though is that we're talking a level low enough that I don't know the answer for sure. Again, I am not sure about this, and it is the sort of thing that one typically makes mistakes about if one does not go by the data. So, I am going to hold judgment on it, but my intuitions are not running in the same direction as yours. I keep remembering how the following of good OOP principles can make Java applications faster that C applications doing the exact same thing, although most think that would not be the case. Just the other day I was reading about a guy who tried and failed to do some imaging work in early Java and had to go to C. Now Java is faster in that area. snip I too await the data :) But, I think you'd have to agree that for your approach to wind up being faster, much like when Java programs are faster than C programs, it must be due to some hidden optimization going on. I mean, on an operation-per-operation basis, C will ALWAYS beat Java... Simply put, there will always be less machine code ops going on with a C program at the lowest levels (assuming they algorithmically equivalent) than a Java program. But, because a Java program can be optimized at runtime, that's where the speed gains occur that you can't get with C. Something similar must be happening if your approach winds up being faster. All things being equal (ceteris paribus), that's the only logical conclusion to reach. That doesn't make it the right one of course :) The data will be the decider... I think there are trade-offs that will need to be measured. For example, I can envision with some of the stuff I do creating whole pages dynamically with images. The new Java imaging stuff is really, really, cool on this. Flash has its side too. No argument there... it's the same with OOP vs. strictly procedural code... if we assume we're always talking a straight compile to machine code and similar optimizations in both, procedural code should generally be faster for the same reason I talked about above. Clearly though, the benefits of an OOP approach outweigh any difference. Same could be true here. Now just one moment, Bub! LOL ;-) You really are not seeing the ways you can save time here. For example, there is such a thing as caching, pragmas and expiry headers which can be set with a response in a way that the meta tags just cannot handle. But now your pushing those caching decisions back on the browser, right? I thought one of your basic premises was to not trust the browser to construct URLs and such? Wouldn't you have the same distrust for caching? (and probably worse since that is at least at the users' discrection) There will be savings of creating no calls where pure HTML would be lost. There will be other things like this too. Remember too that the ResourceAction class is acting as a multithreaded alternative mini-server. Indeed, the approach allows us to get the images, for example, from some other server that is maximized to do just this. Conceivably that could be quicker for cached images. Remember I said conceivably. The ability to be flexible can make for great rewards in efficiency and fluidity that are not immediately obvious. Granted, some additional flexibility might outweigh any problems. If you rolled my BLOBServerAction into your ResourceAction, then you could transparently serve images from
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
Dakota Jack wrote: app server = (AS) struts server = (SS) req = request -- = pass res = response You lost me here already... What's the difference between the app server and the struts server? Isn't Struts running IN your app server? With ResourceAction ___ First case HTML = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 Second image JPEG (say) = req (AS) -- res (SS) = 3 . Tenth image JPEG (say) = req (AS) -- res (SS) = 3 WIthout ResourceAction ___ First case HTML = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 First image JPEG (say) = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 Second image JPEG (say) = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 . Tenth image JPEG (say) = req (AS) res (AS) = 2 This is 22 versus 32. Apparently you forgot (I think?) that the app server has to handle ten images too. They don't just go out with the page, although we are looking at this in a very oversimplified sense. I don't see how you got 22 OR 32! :) The first request from the client is for the HTML document, right? So that's one request. The browser then sees ten img tags, regardless of what they point to. So for each one it makes a request. That's 10 requests, right? So it's 11 in all from the client to the server (ignoring for the moment whether server means app server alone or web server in front of app server, or whatever other configuration you might dream up). The only different between the two approaches we've been discussing is what on the server is going to handle each of those 11 requests... Is it a web server sending back a static HTML page for the first request, and then an image for each of the subsequent 10 image requests, or is it a web server returning the HTML page and then an app server returning the images, or an app server returning the page AND the images? There is no question that the AS is quicker with HTML than the SS, but I am not so sure about the images. The SS may be faster. There is lots of room here for tuning. Let me ask you this question... If you are accessing a web site, and you connect directly to the Internet, is that, ignoring things like caching and such, generally going to be faster than going through a proxy? I'd hope you would say yes. Now, clearly, if the proxy is doing caching and/or other optimizations, it might turn out to be faster, but that further proves my point: the web server is like the proxy in this example. -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
snip I think that the ResourceAction class actually acts as the web server and that is why the return is null. The class writes to the responses output stream and that is all the server does, right? I thought so too at first, but upon further reflection I'm not so sure... If a request comes in to the web server and then it forwards it on to the app server, that would mean at some very low level that the web server was passing along the connection to the app server... I'm not so sure it's anything that complex... It may be that the app server renders the response stream, but then passes it back to the web server to return to the client. The bottom line though is that we're talking a level low enough that I don't know the answer for sure. /snip I am certain on this one, because you can do this sort of thing *without* the web or app servers at all. I do this fairly frequently with code not unlike and heavily borrowing in principle from Jason Hunters HttpMessage and HttpsMessage in COS. The ResourceAction sends the response and ends the whole process by returning null. snip I too await the data :) But, I think you'd have to agree that for your approach to wind up being faster, much like when Java programs are faster than C programs, it must be due to some hidden optimization going on. I mean, on an operation-per-operation basis, C will ALWAYS beat Java... /snip Well, maybe on on an operation basis. An operation by any other name is still an operation. However, I don't disagree and would merely quibble about the language and the description. snip Simply put, there will always be less machine code ops going on with a C program at the lowest levels (assuming they algorithmically equivalent) than a Java program. /snip Well put! Yes! snip But, because a Java program can be optimized at runtime, that's where the speed gains occur that you can't get with C. /snip At the very least this is a main place to gain speed: the Tortoise and the Hare come to mind. snip ceteris paribus /snip Heh, I meant to tell you last time, this is Latin, not Greek. LOL ///;-) www.m-w.com Main Entry: ce·te·ris pa·ri·bus Pronunciation: 'kA-tr-s-'par--bs, 'ke-, 'se- Function: adverb Etymology: New Latin, other things being equal : if all other relevant things, factors, or elements remain unaltered snip But now your pushing those caching decisions back on the browser, right? I thought one of your basic premises was to not trust the browser to construct URLs and such? Wouldn't you have the same distrust for caching? (and probably worse since that is at least at the users' discrection) /snip The answers are no, yes, no. Setting caching in the response object is not equivalent to setting caching in the meta tags. This is why the ResourceAction has an edge. Note also that the setting of cache, pragma and expires are runtime alterable, and can override the meta tags, in ResourceAction. I left those decisions out of the code I sent you. Did you notice where I added in it response to someone's query on that? snip Granted, some additional flexibility might outweigh any problems. If you rolled my BLOBServerAction into your ResourceAction, then you could transparently serve images from WEB-INF *or* a database, transparently to the user and front-end. That's a nice bit of flexibility to be sure. /snip And, if you imagined more radical uses of images for whole pages, etc., then you might start thinking about BufferedImages cached in sessions, etc. snip I leave the leg-work to you :) /snip You got it! Jack -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. We are poor . . . but we are free. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
Too late when I sent this. Let me make the necessary alterations to the nomenclature. Sorry! web server = df. (WS) app server = df. (AS) request= df. req response = df. res = df. passing the control With ResourceAction 1.0 WS req WS res HTML [2] 1.1 WS req AS res [3] 1.2 WS req AS res [3] 1.3 WS req AS res [3] 1.4 WS req AS res [3] 1.5 WS req AS res [3] 1.6 WS req AS res [3] 1.7 WS req AS res [3] 1.8 WS req AS res [3] 1.9 WS req AS res [3] 1.10 WS req AS res [3] Total 32 Without ResourceAction 1.0 WS req WS res HTML [2] 1.1 WS req AS res [2] 1.2 WS req AS res [2] 1.3 WS req AS res [2] 1.4 WS req AS res [2] 1.5 WS req AS res [2] 1.6 WS req AS res [2] 1.7 WS req AS res [2] 1.8 WS req AS res [2] 1.9 WS req AS res [2] 1.10 WS req AS res [2] Total 22 However, let me note, once again, that we can make it 22 to 22 by simply sending the attributes that are relevant back to a different server. For example, we could have img src='http://blahblahblah.com/ResourceAction.do?file=whatever.gif' Doing this, if we are talking about serving images to a large-scale site, we could get rid of both the WS and the AS and use a SCS (small custom server) optimized for this situation. I do this sort of thing constantly, *sub rosa*, on my sites. This is probably quicker than using WS to serve the images, and certainly so if the images are in any way dynamic in nature and if we make use of the multithreading opportunities that crop up in this situation. But, this is going afield. And, this is only looking at the upside too. Jack -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. We are poor . . . but we are free. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
Dakota Jack wrote: I am certain on this one, because you can do this sort of thing *without* the web or app servers at all. I do this fairly frequently with code not unlike and heavily borrowing in principle from Jason Hunters HttpMessage and HttpsMessage in COS. The ResourceAction sends the response and ends the whole process by returning null. I agree, obviously you can take Tomcat for instance and use it to serve everything... I have a production app that is a single server running Tomcat and Oracle and that's it, no web server anywhere, everything is served from Tomcat whether it's a JSP, an image, an HTML document or whatever else. The question that's in my mind though is what happens when you have a web server in front of Tomcat? Just rendering to the response in a servlet might not be enough in that case... Think of a proxy analogy... Does the web server almost appear like a proxy? In other words, a request comes in to the web server, does it (a) pass the connection to the app server to fulfill, at which point it's done and can service more requests, or (b) does it ask the app server for the resource, whatever it is, wait for the response from the app server and send it along to the client when the app server is done responding? Same idea as a network proxy. The point being, just because the app server CAN serve everything, doesn't necasserily mean it WILL with a web server in front. But again, I don't know the answer here, it's just a question in my mind. ceteris paribus /snip Heh, I meant to tell you last time, this is Latin, not Greek. LOL ///;-) Really?? Well, I have something to yell at my Macroeconomics professor for then! I know for sure she said it was Greek! :) Funny aside... My Macroeconomics professor... her last name, and I couldn't have made this up, is Economopolous. That just rules! But now your pushing those caching decisions back on the browser, right? I thought one of your basic premises was to not trust the browser to construct URLs and such? Wouldn't you have the same distrust for caching? (and probably worse since that is at least at the users' discrection) /snip The answers are no, yes, no. Setting caching in the response object is not equivalent to setting caching in the meta tags. This is why the ResourceAction has an edge. Note also that the setting of cache, pragma and expires are runtime alterable, and can override the meta tags, in ResourceAction. I left those decisions out of the code I sent you. Did you notice where I added in it response to someone's query on that? I did notice, but my point is that the browser settings would override any tags or headers you set. I might be wrong about that, but that would be my expectation. After all, what good is a setting in my browser that says don't cache anything if a web site designer can come along and overrule that? Surely the FOSS community would be up in arms over their loss of freedom, right?!? ;) -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
I still don't understanding the 32 and 22... What do the [2] and [3]'s represent? Dakota Jack wrote: Too late when I sent this. Let me make the necessary alterations to the nomenclature. Sorry! web server = df. (WS) app server = df. (AS) request= df. req response = df. res = df. passing the control With ResourceAction 1.0 WS req WS res HTML [2] 1.1 WS req AS res [3] 1.2 WS req AS res [3] 1.3 WS req AS res [3] 1.4 WS req AS res [3] 1.5 WS req AS res [3] 1.6 WS req AS res [3] 1.7 WS req AS res [3] 1.8 WS req AS res [3] 1.9 WS req AS res [3] 1.10 WS req AS res [3] Total 32 Without ResourceAction 1.0 WS req WS res HTML [2] 1.1 WS req AS res [2] 1.2 WS req AS res [2] 1.3 WS req AS res [2] 1.4 WS req AS res [2] 1.5 WS req AS res [2] 1.6 WS req AS res [2] 1.7 WS req AS res [2] 1.8 WS req AS res [2] 1.9 WS req AS res [2] 1.10 WS req AS res [2] Total 22 However, let me note, once again, that we can make it 22 to 22 by simply sending the attributes that are relevant back to a different server. For example, we could have img src='http://blahblahblah.com/ResourceAction.do?file=whatever.gif' Doing this, if we are talking about serving images to a large-scale site, we could get rid of both the WS and the AS and use a SCS (small custom server) optimized for this situation. I do this sort of thing constantly, *sub rosa*, on my sites. This is probably quicker than using WS to serve the images, and certainly so if the images are in any way dynamic in nature and if we make use of the multithreading opportunities that crop up in this situation. But, this is going afield. And, this is only looking at the upside too. Jack If we are talking about dynamically-created resources, then I would tend to agree with your view. But we have, at least as far as I was concerned, been talking about strictly static resources. In that case, your basic premise boils down to, as I see it: An app server running ResourceAction can serve resources more efficiently than a web server. Again, strictly talking about static resources, I would be absolutely SCHOCKED to learn this is the case under most circumstances. That would be like saying a Cadillac could beat a NASCAR vehicle in 1 ten-lap race... It might be able to under some circumstances, like the NASCAR driver being drunk!, and certainly there are some very nice trade-offs to driving the Caddy like more room and a better stereo, but in general you wouldn't expect the Caddy to lose. A bit of hyperbole there, but the underlying point is what's important. -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
snip The question that's in my mind though is what happens when you have a web server in front of Tomcat? Just rendering to the response in a servlet might not be enough in that case... /snip *Before* ResourceAction returns null, the response output stream has been written, flushed, and closed. The only thing that the app server or the web server have left to deal with is that null. There is no wrapper in this case and no proxy in the sense you are talking. The OutputStream from an HttpResponse object writes to the client. snip The point being, just because the app server CAN serve everything, doesn't necasserily mean it WILL with a web server in front. /snip But, in this case, the OutputStream does and there is no pass it on functionality in there that would incorporate any reference or use of the web or app server. The fact that this OutputStream ends the process might be one of the factors favoring ResourceAction. snip ceteris paribus /snip Heh, I meant to tell you last time, this is Latin, not Greek. LOL ///;-) Really?? Well, I have something to yell at my Macroeconomics professor for then! I know for sure she said it was Greek! :) Funny aside... My Macroeconomics professor... her last name, and I couldn't have made this up, is Economopolous. That just rules! /snip LOL Economopolous! Hilarious Remember My Big Fat Greek Wedding where the Greek guy has a way of turning everything to Greek history, etc.? Well, Ms. Economopolous is clearly Greek and her name is Economic-city. (Plato's Republic was really Politia which means The City. Republic comes from Republica which was a Latin translation.) Anyway, this is ALL ceteris paribus. (You can tell Latin from the endings, ibus is the dative plural.) snip I did notice, but my point is that the browser settings would override any tags or headers you set. I might be wrong about that, but that would be my expectation. After all, what good is a setting in my browser that says don't cache anything if a web site designer can come along and overrule that? Surely the FOSS community would be up in arms over their loss of freedom, right?!? ;) /snip The good is that the web site designer knows when a change has been made and the assumption is that you are going to see what the web site designer has to offer. No? Jack -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. We are poor . . . but we are free. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
snip On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:11:24 -0500, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I still don't understanding the 32 and 22... What do the [2] and [3]'s represent? /snip A total of three possible processes (1) getting the request; (2) passing the request to another server; (3) handling the response. If you have them all, you have a three. If only 1 and 3, then you have a two. snip If we are talking about dynamically-created resources, then I would tend to agree with your view. But we have, at least as far as I was concerned, been talking about strictly static resources. /snip If there are static resources, then we can get it down to 22 versus 22 by sending the images to a separate server. Not only can we do this, but we can send the images to a super efficient separate server if we are talking about static images only. snip An app server running ResourceAction can serve resources more efficiently than a web server. /snip Not that an app server is faster under any circumstances tha a web server. That really is not close to true. I've seen the stats on that one and I would doubt that they will ever be the same or close to the same. I would be as SCHOCKED as you (is this an Italian-Jewish SHOCKED? ///;-) ) in that case. What I am talking about is a custom server for images which gets rid of a LOT of baggage, including WEB-INF but having the same protections as being under WEB-INF. snip Again, strictly talking about static resources, I would be absolutely SCHOCKED to learn this is the case under most circumstances. That would be like saying a Cadillac could beat a NASCAR vehicle in 1 ten-lap race... It might be able to under some circumstances, like the NASCAR driver being drunk!, and certainly there are some very nice trade-offs to driving the Caddy like more room and a better stereo, but in general you wouldn't expect the Caddy to lose. /snip In this case the analogy, IF apt, is the reverse. The custom server is the NASCAR. All the doodads needed on an app or a web server can be pealed off and serious savings with multithreading, parsing presumptions, etc. can be realized. snip A bit of hyperbole there, but the underlying point is what's important. /snip I enjoyed the ride in the caddy. Had the stereo on a good jazz station in my mind with Lead Belly growling at me. The metaphor is apt but really, when you are talking a mini-quick-custom server, reversed. I am actually surprised that there are not more of these little speedy and specialized servers around. Jack This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
Dakota Jack wrote: The good is that the web site designer knows when a change has been made and the assumption is that you are going to see what the web site designer has to offer. No? Jack I concur with the assumption, but I don't see it making any difference... Remember that what we affectionately refer to as the web these days is really a lot more than what it was originally. One of the things that was originally intended is that the client is in complete control. If the user wants to request a resource from a server, and they tell their browser via a setting that no, I WANT you to go ask that server EVERY SINGLE TIME for the resources, NEVER use what you might have in the local cache, then they should be allowed to do that, and whatever the web site creator wants you to do is irrelevant. Same idea when the user can override fonts and colors and the like with their own local settings. Nowadays though, us web app/site designers think WE know how best a client should view our site, and we actually go out of our way to make it so... how many times have you visited a site where the font is too small and the usual font size adjustments don't make any difference? So you have to go in to setting and uncheck that User Font Sizes Specified By Site option. Annoying, and not what was originally intended. This is of course all only relevant to the extent that it supports my point, that anything you do on the server side to try and control caching is either (a) useless because the end user can override it anyway or (b) not in keeping with the spirit of the web, at least, not as originally intended. Now I'm off on a bit of a tangent though :) -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Just from a curiosity standpoint Jack... I've already decided it's not an approach I'd advocate, but I am interested to know how you serve things like graphics and stylesheets from under WEB-INF. I assume all your graphics are actually server by an Action (a trick I've pulled when serving images from a database), and I further assume your stylesheets aren't just linked in... -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com Dakota Jack wrote: snip On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:57:33 -0500, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think his problem is probably linking to stylesheets and such... Actually, now I have to ask you... if you put *everything* under WEB-INF, I assume you are serving all graphics from a fronting web server then? Otherwise, any document returned to the user that links back to a resource under WEB-INF won't be reachable, which was the crux of his problem as I understood it, that's why he was talking about includes and such all over the place. But, if you really are serving everything from there, how are you doing it? Just curious at this point :) -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com Dakota Jack wrote: I don't know why you are saying that css and/or js must be placed directly under WebRoot. Why do you? I can give you various solutions, once I find out what the problem is supposed to be. There is no issue, by the way, with putting your JSP files under WEB-INF. There are other ways to protect access, but this is, I think, a good one too. Jack /snip Frank, are you still interested in this? I just noticed it. Jack - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
snip
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:00:39 -0500, Frank W. Zammetti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just from a curiosity standpoint Jack... I've already decided it's not
an approach I'd advocate, but I am interested to know how you serve
things like graphics and stylesheets from under WEB-INF. I assume all
your graphics are actually server by an Action (a trick I've pulled when
serving images from a database), and I further assume your stylesheets
aren't just linked in...
/snip
img src='resource.do?file=whatever.jpg'
link
href='resource.do?file=whatever.css'
rel='stylesheet'
type='text/css'
You can also put this sort of Struts protocol into Flash ActionScript, etc.
To be complete on this list:
public final class ResourceAction
extends Action {
public ActionForward execute(ActionMapping mapping,
ActionForm form,
HttpServletRequest request,
HttpServletResponse response)
throws IOException,
ServletException {
String file = request.getParameter(file);
String ext = file.substring(file.lastIndexOf('.') + 1);
String type = null;
String path = null;
if (gif.equals(ext)) {
type = image/gif;
path = path(gif);
} else if (jpg.equals(ext)) {
type = image/jpeg;
path = path(jpeg);
} else if (css.equals(ext)) {
type = text/css;
path = path(css);
} else if (flash.equals(ext)) {
type = application/x-shockwave-flash;
path = path(flash);
} else if (text.equals(ext)) {
type = text/plain;
path = path(text);
} else if (js.equals(ext)) {
type = text/javascript;
path = path(js);
} else if (png.equals(ext)) {
type = image/png;
path = path(png);
} else if (html.equals(ext)) {
type = text/html;
path = path(html);
} else if (applet.equals(ext)) {
type = application/x-java-applet;
path = classes + File.separator + com + File.separator +
crackwillow + File.separator + applet;
}
String name = Classpath.WEB_INF + path + file;
response.setContentType(type);
response.setHeader(Cache-Control, );
response.setHeader(Pragma, );
response.setHeader(Expires, );
response.addHeader(Content-Disposition,filename= + name);
try {
FileInputStream fis = new FileInputStream(name);
BufferedInputStream bis = new BufferedInputStream(fis);
byte[] bytes = new byte[bis.available()];
OutputStreamos= response.getOutputStream();
bis.read(bytes);
os.write(bytes);
os.flush();
os.close();
} catch (IOException ioe) {
StdOut.log(SiteConstant.ERROR_LOG,ResourceAction: problem file
is: + name + \n + StackTrace.trace(ioe) + \n +
ioe.getMessage());
}
return null;
}
private String path(String fileType) {
return resource + File.separator + content_type +
File.separator + fileType + File.separator;
}
} ///;-)
--
You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back.
~Dakota Jack~
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
~Native Proverb~
Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be
crows. We are poor . . . but we are free.
~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~
This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the
addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based
on this message or any information herein. If you have received this
message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail
and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
One thing worth pointing out about this is that you'll lose the benefit
of fronting your app server with a web server... You won't be able to
offload the serving of images, stylesheets and such, from the app server
to the web server. That's probably not a big problem in many cases
where a single server with a decent set of specs can handle the load
anyway, but in a more robust enterprise environment, your really kind
of defeating the purpose of a fleet of web servers in front of a number
of app servers.
--
Frank W. Zammetti
Founder and Chief Software Architect
Omnytex Technologies
http://www.omnytex.com
Dakota Jack wrote:
snip
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:00:39 -0500, Frank W. Zammetti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just from a curiosity standpoint Jack... I've already decided it's not
an approach I'd advocate, but I am interested to know how you serve
things like graphics and stylesheets from under WEB-INF. I assume all
your graphics are actually server by an Action (a trick I've pulled when
serving images from a database), and I further assume your stylesheets
aren't just linked in...
/snip
img src='resource.do?file=whatever.jpg'
link
href='resource.do?file=whatever.css'
rel='stylesheet'
type='text/css'
You can also put this sort of Struts protocol into Flash ActionScript, etc.
To be complete on this list:
public final class ResourceAction
extends Action {
public ActionForward execute(ActionMapping mapping,
ActionForm form,
HttpServletRequest request,
HttpServletResponse response)
throws IOException,
ServletException {
String file = request.getParameter(file);
String ext = file.substring(file.lastIndexOf('.') + 1);
String type = null;
String path = null;
if (gif.equals(ext)) {
type = image/gif;
path = path(gif);
} else if (jpg.equals(ext)) {
type = image/jpeg;
path = path(jpeg);
} else if (css.equals(ext)) {
type = text/css;
path = path(css);
} else if (flash.equals(ext)) {
type = application/x-shockwave-flash;
path = path(flash);
} else if (text.equals(ext)) {
type = text/plain;
path = path(text);
} else if (js.equals(ext)) {
type = text/javascript;
path = path(js);
} else if (png.equals(ext)) {
type = image/png;
path = path(png);
} else if (html.equals(ext)) {
type = text/html;
path = path(html);
} else if (applet.equals(ext)) {
type = application/x-java-applet;
path = classes + File.separator + com + File.separator +
crackwillow + File.separator + applet;
}
String name = Classpath.WEB_INF + path + file;
response.setContentType(type);
response.setHeader(Cache-Control, );
response.setHeader(Pragma, );
response.setHeader(Expires, );
response.addHeader(Content-Disposition,filename= + name);
try {
FileInputStream fis = new FileInputStream(name);
BufferedInputStream bis = new BufferedInputStream(fis);
byte[] bytes = new byte[bis.available()];
OutputStreamos= response.getOutputStream();
bis.read(bytes);
os.write(bytes);
os.flush();
os.close();
} catch (IOException ioe) {
StdOut.log(SiteConstant.ERROR_LOG,ResourceAction: problem file
is: + name + \n + StackTrace.trace(ioe) + \n +
ioe.getMessage());
}
return null;
}
private String path(String fileType) {
return resource + File.separator + content_type +
File.separator + fileType + File.separator;
}
} ///;-)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
snip On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:17:03 -0500, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing worth pointing out about this is that you'll lose the benefit of fronting your app server with a web server... You won't be able to offload the serving of images, stylesheets and such, from the app server to the web server. That's probably not a big problem in many cases where a single server with a decent set of specs can handle the load anyway, but in a more robust enterprise environment, your really kind of defeating the purpose of a fleet of web servers in front of a number of app servers. /snip Lo, Frank. You really don't lose anything. You just gain a choice. There is a lot more to be said on this, but you probably would know everything on this anyway, so I will leave it at that. Jack -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. We are poor . . . but we are free. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Lo, Frank. You really don't lose anything. You just gain a choice. There is a lot more to be said on this, but you probably would know everything on this anyway, so I will leave it at that. That's not strictly true though Jack (neither your premise that you don't lose anything or that I know everything about this, I almost certainly don't!)... In some environments, as I'm sure you know and probably have even dealt with, you have a bunch of web servers in front of a bunch of app servers. The web servers serve static content like images, stylesheets and usually server-side includes, things like that, while the app server handles JSPs and actual server-side (servlet) code. Putting everything under WEB-INF removes this choice because every request has to be routed to your app servers now. In larger scenarios, the whole point of the web servers (well, most of the point anyway) is to offload that work from the app servers and gain efficiency. Division of labor and all that jazz. :) I'd certainly agree that if a particular situation doesn't call for such a distributed environment in the first place, than it's a moot point, and what you suggest certainly has some benefits. But if that's not the case, or if it some day might not be the case (i.e., your app might have to scale into such an environment), then it could become an issue and people should be aware of it before they make their decision. I also don't know what effect this might have in a true distributed environment (i.e., might it be a problem if one request, say for an image, is serviced by one machine, while another services the JSP execuetion itself?). This might never arise, or it might not be a problem at all even if it does, but it could be something for someone to explore is my point. -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com Dakota Jack wrote: snip On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:17:03 -0500, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing worth pointing out about this is that you'll lose the benefit of fronting your app server with a web server... You won't be able to offload the serving of images, stylesheets and such, from the app server to the web server. That's probably not a big problem in many cases where a single server with a decent set of specs can handle the load anyway, but in a more robust enterprise environment, your really kind of defeating the purpose of a fleet of web servers in front of a number of app servers. /snip Lo, Frank. You really don't lose anything. You just gain a choice. There is a lot more to be said on this, but you probably would know everything on this anyway, so I will leave it at that. Jack - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
Hi, Frank, Always good discussing these matters with you. I think you are going to get a kick out of the turn this reply to your response will get. I AM GOING TO REVEAL WHY I THINK THAT THE BASIC STRUTS ARCHITECTURE, AND .do IN PARTICULAR, IS THE WAVE OF THE FUTURE, NOT THE PAST. [Imagine Mission Impossible music in the background.] I have great faith in the Servlet, but not the JSP, idea. I am going to tell you something that you might have missed. There is no need to have a JSP page to do this. This is NOT dynamic content. This is strictly HTML. So, the page that has this is not thereby crippled at all in this sense. There is nothing in using this that changes HTML to JSP or any other dynamic pages. That is the miracle of returns null; This is a different kettle of fish. Please note, also that the HTML for the ResourceAction can access any server it wants. This is highly flexible, not staid and bound. ' The key here is the use of a PROTOCOL instead of a URL. What happens when you do that is not immediately obvious. Personally, I avoid URLs whenever possible as they merely couple your work to options you probably will frequently wish you did not have to take. Read on! snip On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:10:08 -0500, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lo, Frank. You really don't lose anything. You just gain a choice. There is a lot more to be said on this, but you probably would know everything on this anyway, so I will leave it at that. That's not strictly true though Jack (neither your premise that you don't lose anything or that I know everything about this, I almost certainly don't!)... In some environments, as I'm sure you know and probably have even dealt with, you have a bunch of web servers in front of a bunch of app servers. The web servers serve static content like images, stylesheets and usually server-side includes, things like that, while the app server handles JSPs and actual server-side (servlet) code. /snip The ResourceAction requires Struts but does not require JSP. Cool? Remember that Struts has nothing to do with JSP, Velocity, etc. This is pure HTML requiring Struts. snip Putting everything under WEB-INF removes this choice because every request has to be routed to your app servers now. /snip Surprisingly, perhaps, not so! There is nothing in an HTML page that has the Struts protocol for the ResourceAction code which makes that page dynamic, even though the content is. This is pure HTML. That is why it works so great inside Flash ActionScript too. You cannot, after all, put JSP inside Flash ActionScript. Frankly, no pun intended, Frank, I have considered doing all tags via something like this and through Struts Actions. That would mean that your page designers would have freedom you could not believe and that the same pages could work for any backend language. I have done some dabbling with this and have internally called them ProtoCallPages. I suspect the use of JPP (a sort of Action page language which is based on having to have the code off the page) in conjunction with Servlets is much better than in conjunction with JSP or other tag based ideas. We'll see in time. What do you think? I am sure that there are huge issues to consider but my experience with ResoureAction tells me that things might work out fine. I actually sort of compound JPP with some Struts form tags to get dynamic images with language, size, background and foreground colors (or images), fonts, etc. all dynamic but requiring only a protocol for my part. I have considered just droping the Struts part altogether and keeping JPP doing all the form stuff with pure HTML but with all the dynamic results you get from things like JSP, ASP, etc. Anyway, enough of this. Don't you know better than to get me talking? ;-) LOL That's why I love talking to you. You not only have a lot to say, you also listen. Nice combination! snip In larger scenarios, the whole point of the web servers (well, most of the point anyway) is to offload that work from the app servers and gain efficiency. Division of labor and all that jazz. :) /snip Agreed, although I would certainly love to see a huge discussion by the mavens in the area on that one. I think that there is more than meets the eye to that. Still, however, agreed! snip I'd certainly agree that if a particular situation doesn't call for such a distributed environment in the first place, than it's a moot point, and what you suggest certainly has some benefits. But if that's not the case, or if it some day might not be the case (i.e., your app might have to scale into such an environment), then it could become an issue and people should be aware of it before they make their decision. I also don't know what effect this might have in a true distributed environment (i.e., might it be a problem if one request, say for an image, is serviced by one machine, while another services the JSP execuetion
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
Dakota Jack wrote: I am going to tell you something that you might have missed. There is no need to have a JSP page to do this. This is NOT dynamic content. This is strictly HTML. I fully understand that. Keep in mind that a recent project I did required that images be served out of a database. To do this I wrote a BLOBServerAction that results in tags like this: img src=BLOBServer.do?table=logos%field=logoquery=where id='123' (with the query URL encoded of course). This is very much like what you do, except that my BLOBServerAction allows me to serve any BLOB-type from a database. Very similar concept, which is why I know where you are coming from full well. The key here is the use of a PROTOCOL instead of a URL. What happens when you do that is not immediately obvious. Personally, I avoid URLs whenever possible as they merely couple your work to options you probably will frequently wish you did not have to take. Read on! I can't say I understand what your saying here. Can you dumb it down a bit for an old man? :) The ResourceAction requires Struts but does not require JSP. Cool? Remember that Struts has nothing to do with JSP, Velocity, etc. This is pure HTML requiring Struts. Absolutely. snip Putting everything under WEB-INF removes this choice because every request has to be routed to your app servers now. /snip Surprisingly, perhaps, not so! There is nothing in an HTML page that has the Struts protocol for the ResourceAction code which makes that page dynamic, even though the content is. This is pure HTML. That is why it works so great inside Flash ActionScript too. You cannot, after all, put JSP inside Flash ActionScript. What I was getting at is the fact that if I return a page to the browser that have ten images, all referencing ResourceAction, what's happening is that the browser is making ten separate requests TO THE APP SERVER, whereas in a typical setup, these requests would be handled by the fronting web servers. It's clearly more resource-intensive in your approach. As I said before, if your environment is a single server anyway, even if you have a web server in front of an app server, this probably doesn't make much difference, although it will always make some becuase the app server is involved instead of just the web server. That was my original point. Frankly, no pun intended, Frank, I have considered doing all tags via something like this and through Struts Actions. That would mean that your page designers would have freedom you could not believe and that the same pages could work for any backend language. Agreed. I do see the advantage of this approach, but it's the minuses I'm more concerned with. No matter which way you slice it, there's more server resources being utilized. That's a big minus when your talking about scalability. What do you think? I think you point out some valid advantages... if nothing else, just doing away with having to deal with URLs is a very good thing. But I think the performance hit, and certainly the server load, in a typical Enterprise environment, would make this not a great idea. Then again, I say the exact same thing about ASP.Net and JSF because the whole idea of calling a server for relatively simple UI events strikes me as a horrible idea until we have far better networks than we have today, and I seem to be in the minority there, so if I might be wrong there, I might be wrong here too :) Don't you know better than to get me talking? ;-) LOL That's why I love talking to you. You not only have a lot to say, you also listen. Nice combination! My wife wouldn't agree with the listening part :) snip In larger scenarios, the whole point of the web servers (well, most of the point anyway) is to offload that work from the app servers and gain efficiency. Division of labor and all that jazz. :) /snip Agreed, although I would certainly love to see a huge discussion by the mavens in the area on that one. I think that there is more than meets the eye to that. Still, however, agreed! snip I think in enterprise-type environments this is a pretty standard approach with fairly well agreed upon benefits. Anything that breaks it has to exceed those benefits. As my father used to say, that's a tough nut to crack! Nothing wrong with trying to build the hammer though :) Certainly there are things one would have to do in a distributed environment, but the fact that there is a complete decoupling by using a protocol rather than a URL makes all these problems easily solveable. You can do wonders with this sort of thing which you would never consider prior to doing this. You ought to try it on some project and watch where you will be surprised. This is so efficient and flexible. Remember, the code src='resource.do?file='my.css' is stricly HTML. Absolutely it is, but as I pointed out, it's being interpreted on the browser side. That's where the issue comes in to play I think, especially in
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
Well, I sure got excited, though. Back to reality! ;-) snip What I was getting at is the fact that if I return a page to the browser that have ten images, all referencing ResourceAction, what's happening is that the browser is making ten separate requests TO THE APP SERVER, whereas in a typical setup, these requests would be handled by the fronting web servers. It's clearly more resource-intensive in your approach. /snip I am not clear what part of the process you are referring to, Frank. We both agree that the first delivery of the page is via the front server (I tend to only use the back server anyway). If there are ten calls to ten images, as you assume for discussion purposes, then there will be ten calls either way. I think you are saying that in addition there will be a penalty of a pass to a server that can handle Servlets or an equivalent technology that will respond to the ProtocolPage by routing the call to some Action, Command, or whatever in some language, in the way I suggest. Is that right? If so, let me know and we will go from there after you confirm. snip Agreed. I do see the advantage of this approach, but it's the minuses I'm more concerned with. No matter which way you slice it, there's more server resources being utilized. That's a big minus when your talking about scalability. /snip I wouild need, as you would too I assume, more information on the actual penalty. I suspect that it is relatively small and, when you introduce sophisticated state and caching options, it may be faster. I don't dismiss what you are saying. Don't get me wrong. I just have learned to get the data and then to see what the real difference is. When considering costs and so on, I am not sure whether the balance goes to which side. I would suspect, from my experience, that software maintenance and so on would clearly outweigh the hardware and associated requirements. snip I think you point out some valid advantages... if nothing else, just doing away with having to deal with URLs is a very good thing. But I think the performance hit, and certainly the server load, in a typical Enterprise environment, would make this not a great idea. /snip I am surprised at this. You may be right, but my sense is that this difference is not really that important when everything else is taken into account. Even if you had to cluster multiple machines instead of one, say, as a ratio, that would seem to be *probably* cheaper as a GUESS. I don't know. We could look at some data and if you have any handy I would love to see it. snip Then again, I say the exact same thing about ASP.Net and JSF because the whole idea of calling a server for relatively simple UI events strikes me as a horrible idea until we have far better networks than we have today, and I seem to be in the minority there, so if I might be wrong there, I might be wrong here too :) /snip I think the bigger hit is reading the danged thing. This obviously is especially so when there is an ongoing use of changing the JSP page. This has no penalty with ProtocolPages. snip My wife wouldn't agree with the listening part :) /snip Well, I bet you are being too humble. I am happy to say that my wife just thinks I am the most adorable, wonderful, guy. Go figure, eh? snip I think in enterprise-type environments this is a pretty standard approach with fairly well agreed upon benefits. Anything that breaks it has to exceed those benefits. As my father used to say, that's a tough nut to crack! Nothing wrong with trying to build the hammer though :) /snip Technology seems to get ahead of rumor in our little world of web work. So, I definitely would like to revisit this. I am going to squeeze getting the *facts* in here soon. snip Absolutely it is, but as I pointed out, it's being interpreted on the browser side. That's where the issue comes in to play I think, especially in a distributed environment. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this point... /snip This seems to be false to me. Maybe I misunderstand you. I don't think the browser has a clue whether we are looking at src='myCss.css' or src='resource.do?file=myCss.css'. Right? Jack -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. We are poor . . . but we are free. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation.
[OT] Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder PROTOCOL PAGES (ProtocolPages)
I marked my response as OT, I think we're going down that road (not exactly unusual for us)... Dakota Jack wrote: What I was getting at is the fact that if I return a page to the browser that have ten images, all referencing ResourceAction, what's happening is that the browser is making ten separate requests TO THE APP SERVER, whereas in a typical setup, these requests would be handled by the fronting web servers. It's clearly more resource-intensive in your approach. /snip I am not clear what part of the process you are referring to, Frank. We both agree that the first delivery of the page is via the front server (I tend to only use the back server anyway). I wasn't clear on that part I guess, but it doesn't change my argument. I guess your saying the pages aren't even JSPs, which is fine. Doesn't really change anything though except that there's no servlet involvement to serve the initial page, which is slightly better. That's cool... If there are ten calls to ten images, as you assume for discussion purposes, then there will be ten calls either way. That's correct. Just basic HTTP here :) I think you are saying that in addition there will be a penalty of a pass to a server that can handle Servlets or an equivalent technology that will respond to the ProtocolPage by routing the call to some Action, Command, or whatever in some language, in the way I suggest. Is that right? If so, let me know and we will go from there after you confirm. That's it exactly. The web server has to forward the .do request to the app server, which then serves the images, 10 total servlet invocations in all. Yes, there would be ten requests either way, but one assumes that the web server can serve static content more efficiently than any Action you can devise. Perfectly logical argument, ceteris paribus (I love using Greek in real conversations!), because that's exactly what web servers are optimized to do. I wouild need, as you would too I assume, more information on the actual penalty. Absolutely. The only assumption I'm making is that there IS a penalty. There are any number of factors that would go into how big or small it is, whether it's enough to outweigh the benefits of the approach. I make no attempt here to reach any conclusion on the magnitude of the problem, if it is a problem at all. I suspect that it is relatively small and, when you introduce sophisticated state and caching options, it may be faster. Relative to what? To the web server dealing with it? I would suspect it's actually relatively BIG compared to that. I'm certainly willing to be proved wrong though. I don't dismiss what you are saying. Don't get me wrong. I just have learned to get the data and then to see what the real difference is. And I would agree that's the right frame of mind in all things :) It may in fact be such a small penalty that it's worth ignoring. I have a suspicion it's not, but without empirical data, it's just a hypothesis. When considering costs and so on, I am not sure whether the balance goes to which side. I would suspect, from my experience, that software maintenance and so on would clearly outweigh the hardware and associated requirements. That might be true... one other point to remember though is that the more unusual things you do, the harder it will be to get people able to maintain it. I fight standards at work as much as the next guy just because creative people don't like standards forced on them, but clever solutions usual equal difficult to maintain solutions. I don't think I'm telling you something you don't know :) But, that's not my argument, so don't spend any time on it. Just another side track we could go down :) I am surprised at this. You may be right, but my sense is that this difference is not really that important when everything else is taken into account. Even if you had to cluster multiple machines instead of one, say, as a ratio, that would seem to be *probably* cheaper as a GUESS. I don't know. We could look at some data and if you have any handy I would love to see it. I don't have any handy, but I agree, some real data here would be better than us bantering back and forth for the next week :) I suppose the simplest thing to do is set up a test where you serve 10 static images from a web server vs. 10 images from your ResourceAction with a web server in front of the app server and see what the overall response time is. It would be a little rough, but at least we could tell if there is a perceivable difference or not. Then we get into whether thousands of imperceivable hits accumulate enough over time to hurt us. That's obviously far trickier to guage, but that's the kind of things us enterprise architects have to bother about. :) I think the bigger hit is reading the danged thing. This obviously is especially so when there is an ongoing use of changing the JSP page. This has no penalty with ProtocolPages. Not
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
snip On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:57:33 -0500, Frank W. Zammetti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think his problem is probably linking to stylesheets and such... Actually, now I have to ask you... if you put *everything* under WEB-INF, I assume you are serving all graphics from a fronting web server then? Otherwise, any document returned to the user that links back to a resource under WEB-INF won't be reachable, which was the crux of his problem as I understood it, that's why he was talking about includes and such all over the place. But, if you really are serving everything from there, how are you doing it? Just curious at this point :) -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com Dakota Jack wrote: I don't know why you are saying that css and/or js must be placed directly under WebRoot. Why do you? I can give you various solutions, once I find out what the problem is supposed to be. There is no issue, by the way, with putting your JSP files under WEB-INF. There are other ways to protect access, but this is, I think, a good one too. Jack /snip Frank, are you still interested in this? I just noticed it. Jack -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. We are poor . . . but we are free. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Hi Hassan , yes, the .js and .css are externally-accessible, but the .jsp aren't so my jsp can't refer to those .js and .css and after viewing this thread, I think I would take QM approche but u mentioned I can put all jsp into one folder and protect it. How? Is it a web container level or OS level protection ? Regards On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 08:45:00 -0800, Hassan Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Koon Yue Lam wrote: Hi, I want to protect my JSP from direct access, so they can only access by Struts action. but If I want to include some Javascript or CSS to a JSP, I can't ! Because .js and .css needed to place directly under WebRoot I'm afraid I don't understand the issue. If you're putting your JS and CSS in an externally-accessible place (maybe /scripts and /styles) then the standard HTML references for external resources: link rel=stylesheet type=text/css href=/styles/example.css/ style type=text/css@import /styles/example.css;/style script type=text/javascript src=/scripts/example.js/script :: will work fine. The client UA can access them directly (and cache them, which is usually a desirable behavior). HTH, -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Koon Yue Lam wrote: yes, the .js and .css are externally-accessible, but the .jsp aren't so my jsp can't refer to those .js and .css Of course they can; most of my sites work this way. Your JSP is sending HTML to *the client UA* with the URL of the CSS and JavaScript files -- it's the UA that retrieves them. and after viewing this thread, I think I would take QM approche but u mentioned I can put all jsp into one folder and protect it. How? Is it a web container level or OS level protection ? From a previous thread, it seems that one container (BEA, per Wendy Smoak) doesn't support forwarding to JSPs under WEB-INF. Perhaps the ambiguity in the spec will be resolved next time around. But since I have no current plans to use anything but Tomcat, the portability argument carries no weight here -- I put my JSPs in WEB-INF and let the container provide the protection. No fuss, no muss :-) FWIW! -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Quoting Koon Yue Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Hassan , yes, the .js and .css are externally-accessible, but the .jsp aren't so my jsp can't refer to those .js and .css Huh? Why would you say that? Let's say I have the following structure... myapp /assets /style/my.css /script/my.js /WEB-INF web.xml /jsp/my.jsp And my.jsp looks like... html head link rel=Stylesheet href=assets/style/my.css type=text/css script src=assets/script/my.js type=text/javascript/script titlemock jsp/title /head body h1Hello World/h1 body /html So, what's the problem? The link and script locations are loaded by the browser and have no relation whatsoever to the actual location of your JSP. Keep in mind that the only way you can provide this JSP for viewing is to do a server-side forward to it. Web page resources and links will be resolved relative to the path of the URL in your browser location bar. Note that this wouldn't be strictly true if you redirected to the JSP resource, but this is impossible in this case because you can't redirect to a resoruce existing within WEB-INF because the browser client has no access to it, only the server does. In any case, you can always make the resource URL's relative to the root of the application by doing /myapp/assets/script/my.js. and after viewing this thread, I think I would take QM approche but u mentioned I can put all jsp into one folder and protect it. How? Is it a web container level or OS level protection ? The *only* valid reason I can see for not putting JSPs (not meant for direct viewing) under WEB-INF is lack of server support for it. However, any modern server worth its salt now supports this. If yours doesn't, you might want to think about changing vendors or, at least, upgrading your version to one that supports this feature. My rule of thumb is to put JSP that are not meant for direct viewing (only forwarding to from a controller servlet) under WEB-INF and jsp's that are meant for direct viewing outside of WEB-INF. You get the security for free! Why one would bother with needless extra security configuration is beyond me. And what if you forget or configure it wrong? Jake Regards On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 08:45:00 -0800, Hassan Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Koon Yue Lam wrote: Hi, I want to protect my JSP from direct access, so they can only access by Struts action. but If I want to include some Javascript or CSS to a JSP, I can't ! Because .js and .css needed to place directly under WebRoot I'm afraid I don't understand the issue. If you're putting your JS and CSS in an externally-accessible place (maybe /scripts and /styles) then the standard HTML references for external resources: link rel=stylesheet type=text/css href=/styles/example.css/ style type=text/css@import /styles/example.css;/style script type=text/javascript src=/scripts/example.js/script :: will work fine. The client UA can access them directly (and cache them, which is usually a desirable behavior). HTH, -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Quoting Hassan Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Koon Yue Lam wrote: yes, the .js and .css are externally-accessible, but the .jsp aren't so my jsp can't refer to those .js and .css Of course they can; most of my sites work this way. Your JSP is sending HTML to *the client UA* with the URL of the CSS and JavaScript files -- it's the UA that retrieves them. and after viewing this thread, I think I would take QM approche but u mentioned I can put all jsp into one folder and protect it. How? Is it a web container level or OS level protection ? From a previous thread, it seems that one container (BEA, per Wendy Smoak) doesn't support forwarding to JSPs under WEB-INF. Sure, 6.1 didn't. 8.1 certainly does. I've tried it and it works just fine. Time to upgrade to a modern container. Perhaps the ambiguity in the spec will be resolved next time around. But since I have no current plans to use anything but Tomcat, the portability argument carries no weight here -- I put my JSPs in WEB-INF and let the container provide the protection. No fuss, no muss :-) Exactly. Jake FWIW! -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Laba diena. Dkojame, kad mums parate. Js atsista inut isaugota ms duomen bazje. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Thanks for all the reply, I will try it out tonight and let u all know the result ^^ Regards On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:52:37 +0200 (EET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Laba diena. Dkojame, kad mums parate. Js atsista inut isaugota ms duomen bazje. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
ok, it is really strange that I need to specify full path /myApp/js/myJS.js rather then just js/myJS.js but if I use full path , everything works fine I am using Tomcat 5.028 with Struts 1.1 thanks for all the help Regards On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:08:31 +0800, Koon Yue Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for all the reply, I will try it out tonight and let u all know the result ^^ Regards On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:52:37 +0200 (EET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Laba diena. Dkojame, kad mums parate. Js atsista inut isaugota ms duomen bazje. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
From: Koon Yue Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED] ok, it is really strange that I need to specify full path /myApp/js/myJS.js rather then just js/myJS.js You shouldn't. Or, at least... I don't. It's better not to embed the name of the webapp if you don't have to-- I run the same code under 3 different context names, pointed at the development, test and live database environments. That wouldn't work if I had hardcoded the name of the webapp in the JSP's. If you post the JSP and the HTML it generated, along with the structure of your webapp (where are the JSP's, where are the .js files?) someone can probably help you figure it out. Jacob wrote re: BEA supporting JSP's under WEB-INF: Sure, 6.1 didn't. 8.1 certainly does. I've tried it and it works just fine. Time to upgrade to a modern container. Thanks for the clarification. :) I've never used BEA, I just remember a long time ago recommending this approach and being told it wasn't portable. -- Wendy Smoak - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
I put EVERYTHING under WEB-INF except one index.jsp file, which merely passes the first incoming request to the secret stash! By everything I mean everything! Jack On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:31:32 +0800, Koon Yue Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I want to protect my JSP from direct access, so they can only access by Struts action. but If I want to include some Javascript or CSS to a JSP, I can't ! Because .js and .css needed to place directly under WebRoot My solution is to use jps:include to include all those Javascript and CSS to JSP, but then the JSP will look very ugly and fill up with long long non HTML stuffs .. which is not so nice Is there any any to solve this or I just need to accept this trade-off? Any help would be appreciated Regards - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ --- This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
I don't know why you are saying that css and/or js must be placed directly under WebRoot. Why do you? I can give you various solutions, once I find out what the problem is supposed to be. There is no issue, by the way, with putting your JSP files under WEB-INF. There are other ways to protect access, but this is, I think, a good one too. Jack On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:31:32 +0800, Koon Yue Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I want to protect my JSP from direct access, so they can only access by Struts action. but If I want to include some Javascript or CSS to a JSP, I can't ! Because .js and .css needed to place directly under WebRoot My solution is to use jps:include to include all those Javascript and CSS to JSP, but then the JSP will look very ugly and fill up with long long non HTML stuffs .. which is not so nice Is there any any to solve this or I just need to accept this trade-off? Any help would be appreciated Regards - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it float on its back. ~Dakota Jack~ You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. ~Native Proverb~ Each man is good in His sight. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows. ~Hunkesni (Sitting Bull), Hunkpapa Sioux~ --- This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
I think his problem is probably linking to stylesheets and such... Actually, now I have to ask you... if you put *everything* under WEB-INF, I assume you are serving all graphics from a fronting web server then? Otherwise, any document returned to the user that links back to a resource under WEB-INF won't be reachable, which was the crux of his problem as I understood it, that's why he was talking about includes and such all over the place. But, if you really are serving everything from there, how are you doing it? Just curious at this point :) -- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com Dakota Jack wrote: I don't know why you are saying that css and/or js must be placed directly under WebRoot. Why do you? I can give you various solutions, once I find out what the problem is supposed to be. There is no issue, by the way, with putting your JSP files under WEB-INF. There are other ways to protect access, but this is, I think, a good one too. Jack On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 22:31:32 +0800, Koon Yue Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I want to protect my JSP from direct access, so they can only access by Struts action. but If I want to include some Javascript or CSS to a JSP, I can't ! Because .js and .css needed to place directly under WebRoot My solution is to use jps:include to include all those Javascript and CSS to JSP, but then the JSP will look very ugly and fill up with long long non HTML stuffs .. which is not so nice Is there any any to solve this or I just need to accept this trade-off? Any help would be appreciated Regards - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Quoting Koon Yue Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ok, it is really strange that I need to specify full path /myApp/js/myJS.js rather then just js/myJS.js but if I use full path , everything works fine I am using Tomcat 5.028 with Struts 1.1 The server does not matter. The application framework does not matter. What matters is the URL you are accessing. What is the URL in the location field of your browser? Using relative js/myJS.js means that the URL you are accessing must be at the root of your context path (be it / or /myApp). For instance, if your js directory is at the root of your context, then the following URL would allow the relative path to work... http://localhost:8080/myApp/hello.do Because hello.do is accessed from the root of the context, the relative path to the .js file would be... http://localhost:8080/myApp/js/myJS.js Note that this is identical to specifying the absolute path of /myApp/js/myJS.js. However, the relative path will stop working if your URL goes one directory into your app while the absolutely defined one will continue to work... http://localhost:8080/myApp/somdir/hello.do now your relatively defined path to the .js file would resolve to... http://localhost:8080/myApp/somedir/js/myJS.js If you want to not have to worry about stuff like this, use an absolute path. Don't hardcode the name of your context, though. Use... script src=%=request.getContextPath()%/js/myJS.js type=text/javascript/script Struts has some JSP taglibs to help out with this so you don't necessarily have to use a scriptlet like this everywhere, so look into that, but this gives you the gist of what you need to do to make sure your web resources can be accessed no matter the path of the current URL. Jake thanks for all the help Regards On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 01:08:31 +0800, Koon Yue Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks for all the reply, I will try it out tonight and let u all know the result ^^ Regards On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:52:37 +0200 (EET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Laba diena. Dėkojame, kad mums parašėte. Jūsų atsiųsta žinutė išsaugota mūsų duomenų bazėje. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Your problem is almost certainly the base tag. Why do you have it
there? The href in base will skew the way the browser looks at relative
paths and make it so that they are not resolved to the URL in the location
bar of the browser, but to the URL in the href of the base tag. Besides,
the location makes no sense. You are pointing to a resource under WEB-INF
which is impossible for a browser to access in the first place. Remove
base and your problems are (mostly) solved.
More below...
At 10:13 AM 12/29/2004 +0800, you wrote:
Hi again ! ^^
here is the generated html:
html lang=en
head
base
href=http://localhost:8080/val/WEB-INF/jsp/residential_search.jsp;
titleResidential Search/title
script src=/val/js/resid.js type=text/javascript/script
script
...
...
...
which is using absolute path so no problem here,
but if I use relative path:
script src=/js/resid.js type=text/javascript/script
Was that a typo? You are calling this a relative path, but
/js/resid.js is using an absolute path. Probably just a typo, but I want
to make sure you understand what you are saying here. More below...
then I can reference the .js
and here is the directory structure:
{Tomcat home}/webapps/val
| /js
| /WEB-INF
|--- /jsp (--
which holds all my .jsp)
and the url in the browser is:
http://localhost:8080/val/area_selection.do
so the /js is directly under the root folder, and
script src=/js/resid.js type=text/javascript/script
should work, isn't it??
Ok, I guess you actually don't know what a relative path is because you
keep making the same typo. You have two problems:
1. Remove the base tag. Never, ever use that abomination unless you
have a REALLY good reason to do so. Based on how you are using it, I'm not
even sure you understand what it does?
2. A relative path does *not* have a / prefix. That is an absolute path
pointing to the root of the webserver. Based on the sample URL, your
context is /val. As such, using /js/resid.js would look for the .js
file in a directory at the same level as val, meaning it won't find the
js directory underneath val. Here's where /js/resid.js would point...
http://localhost:8080/js/resid.js
That's, obviously, not what you want. Do one of two things (assuming
you've removed the base tag already!)
1. Use the absolute path /val/js/resid.js
2. Use the relative path js/resid.js
Either one will work. The reason to use #2 is that you don't have to
hardcode the context path. The reason to use #1 is if you expect to be
accessing your area_selection.do struts action at some directory level
deeper into your context path. Take, for instance...
http://localhost:8080/val/admin/area_selection.do
Now if you are using #2, the browser would look in the following location
for the .js resource...
http://localhost:8080/val/admin/js/resid.js
That's, obviously, not what you want. However, if you had used #1, you
wouldn't have noticed a difference in functionality because it would look
in the same location for the .js file as it did when area_selection.do
wasn't under the admin directory. This is the freedom that absolute
paths provide. However, be careful not to hardcode the name of your
context (as I mentioned in another email) because the context name might
change. If and when it does, your absolute path will cease to work. So,
in a JSP, use
%=request.getContextPath()%/js/resid.js
Now you have an absolute path that will work no matter the URL in the
browser location bar. Plus, if you ever decide to switch context names, or
use the default context which is an empty path, your resource will continue
to be found with no need for code changes.
but now it seems I can only use absolute path, which is not a very big
deal but it would be nice if someone help me to sort it out . ^^
Redux:
Absolute path examples...
/myapp/js/my.js
http://localhost:8008/myapp/js/my.js;
relative path example, assuming the URL is something like
http://localhost:8008/myapp/hello.do and the js directory is in the root
of the context...
js/my.js
Notice the lack of the prefixed / in the latter example.
thanks
I really do hope you understand this stuff after my explanation above. It
took me a while to type. I hope it was worth it!
Jake
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Yay! That's what I was hoping to hear :-) Jake At 02:10 PM 12/29/2004 +0800, Koon Yue Lam wrote: YES !!! Everything works fine now after remove the base tag and correct the typo !! I want to give my deepest thanks to you for helping me out with such great effort Regards - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Hi, I want to protect my JSP from direct access, so they can only access by Struts action. but If I want to include some Javascript or CSS to a JSP, I can't ! Because .js and .css needed to place directly under WebRoot My solution is to use jps:include to include all those Javascript and CSS to JSP, but then the JSP will look very ugly and fill up with long long non HTML stuffs .. which is not so nice Is there any any to solve this or I just need to accept this trade-off? Any help would be appreciated Regards - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
On Sun, Dec 26, 2004 at 10:31:32PM +0800, Koon Yue Lam wrote: : Hi, I want to protect my JSP from direct access, so they can only : access by Struts action. So far, so good. First, you don't want to put your JSPs under WEB-INF (as mentioned in your subject line). That makes your webapp less portable, because not all containers support storing content there. Second, you could look into auth constraints (see the servlet spec). Map *.jsp to a constraint to which no user has access. Either that, or put all of your JSPs under one directory that is protected. Either way, this is possible. : If I want to include some Javascript or CSS to a JSP, I can't ! : Because .js and .css needed to place directly under WebRoot : : My solution is to use jps:include to include all those Javascript : and CSS to JSP, but then the JSP will look very ugly and fill up with : long long non HTML stuffs .. which is not so nice Why would it matter if the compiled servlet code is ugly due to the inclusion of the CSS, JavaScript, etc? It's already ugly because of all the print() statements. =) There's a tradeoff between letting clients download static files vs including them in your JSP at runtime. The former option lets clients cache the static file because they download it once for the entire time they browse your site. Then again, making an entire page a single download (using the runtime jsp:include) makes the page self-contained and is thus a courtesy for those who want to save the page for later viewing/printing. -QM -- software -- http://www.brandxdev.net tech news -- http://www.RoarNetworX.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JSP under /WEB-INF folder
Koon Yue Lam wrote: Hi, I want to protect my JSP from direct access, so they can only access by Struts action. but If I want to include some Javascript or CSS to a JSP, I can't ! Because .js and .css needed to place directly under WebRoot I'm afraid I don't understand the issue. If you're putting your JS and CSS in an externally-accessible place (maybe /scripts and /styles) then the standard HTML references for external resources: link rel=stylesheet type=text/css href=/styles/example.css/ style type=text/css@import /styles/example.css;/style script type=text/javascript src=/scripts/example.js/script :: will work fine. The client UA can access them directly (and cache them, which is usually a desirable behavior). HTH, -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
