On Feb 12, 2008, at 11:10 PM, Daniel López wrote:
Regarding your explanation, Scott, that makes sense as I usually try
to
stop the instance normally, and just after that, if the process is
still
alive I kill it manually. It might happen that if the JVM is in the
process of stopping
That sounds great! That's most of what our current shell scripts do,
so I'll be able to reduce them to an alias od run resin with that
specific conf file with the command I pass to you.
Nice!
D.
S'està citant Scott Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Feb 12, 2008, at 11:10 PM, Daniel López
On Feb 12, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Knut Forkalsrud wrote:
Daniel López wrote:
Knut, you seem to have a setup quite similar to ours, are you using
3.1
already or staying if 3.0? If you are using 3.1, are you experiencing
similiar issues or is it just me? ;).
We're on 3.0, but one of my short
Daniel López wrote:
Knut, you seem to have a setup quite similar to ours, are you using 3.1
already or staying if 3.0? If you are using 3.1, are you experiencing
similiar issues or is it just me? ;).
We're on 3.0, but one of my short term objectives is to get us migrated
to 3.1. I think
On Feb 11, 2008, at 11:00 PM, Daniel López wrote:
Hi,
That would be me reporting :). Yeah, the different port in the end
was a
miunderstading, but had nothing to do with the bug itself. I have been
unable/unwilling to try to reproduce it, as the machines where it
happens is the
Hi,
That would be me reporting :). Yeah, the different port in the end was a
miunderstading, but had nothing to do with the bug itself. I have been
unable/unwilling to try to reproduce it, as the machines where it
happens is the production server itself, so I cannot do my tests there.
The
There's a new snapshot available. It now includes the openssl
compiled for 64-bit windows.
We're starting week 9 of 9 for 3.1.5. I'm not sure we'll be able to
release this week, since there's a good number of important open
bugs. If not, it'll be day-by-day next week.
Some things to
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Knut Forkalsrud
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 4:01 PM
To: General Discussion for the Resin application server
Subject: Re: [Resin-interest] 2008-02-11 snapshot
Scott Ferguson wrote:
I thought #2410 was different
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Knut Forkalsrud
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 4:01 PM
To: General Discussion for the Resin application server
Subject: Re: [Resin-interest] 2008-02-11 snapshot
Scott Ferguson wrote:
I thought #2410 was different. If the watchdog-port
On Feb 11, 2008, at 2:54 PM, Knut Forkalsrud wrote:
Scott Ferguson wrote:
There have been some changes to the watchdog. I haven't been able
to duplicate the exact failure scenarios yet, so it would be very
helpful if someone who can reproduce the failures can give me a
simple
me setup
this.
Thanks,
Joey
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Knut Forkalsrud
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 4:01 PM
To: General Discussion for the Resin application server
Subject: Re: [Resin-interest] 2008-02-11 snapshot
Scott Ferguson
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
] On Behalf Of Knut Forkalsrud
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 4:48 PM
To: General Discussion for the Resin application server
Subject: Re: [Resin-interest] 2008-02-11 snapshot
I wouldn't classify my setup as ISP environment. We have a handful
of web
12 matches
Mail list logo
