> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Assuming that the next mod_jk2 release wants to go with
> the present
> > > APR
> > > (0.94) or even the CVS (pre 1.0?) then we need to kludge
> mod_jk on
> > > solaris 8 (at least) to not use APR for this bit.
> > >
> >
> > No i
> -Original Message-
> From: Guenter Knauf
>
> > If it's a APR bug are there any patches that we can propose?
> no.
> The problem is the NetWare OS self. We had formerly no SHM
>
> > The netware, and windows doesn't need shm at all.
> that's not true from APR sight: if I look into ap
Hi,
>> > Also, we adopted the APR as mandatory, so, all platform
>> specific code
>> > except JNI has to go out (sooner or later).
>> sure, I know - but you cant expect that every APR also
>> supports SHM/MMAP; so cant we take only those things which
>> are common to all platforms?
> Does it work
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Assuming that the next mod_jk2 release wants to go with the
> > present APR
> > (0.94) or even the CVS (pre 1.0?) then we need to kludge
> > mod_jk on solaris 8 (at least) to not use APR for this bit.
> >
>
> No it's gonna be 0
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In case of single child mpm, nothing.
On others, jkstatus at least.
Also, we adopted the APR as mandatory, so, all platform
specific code except
JNI has to go out (sooner or later).
MT.
That is f
> -Original Message-
> From: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> In case of single child mpm, nothing.
> On others, jkstatus at least.
>
> Also, we adopted the APR as mandatory, so, all platform
> specific code except
> JNI has to go out (sooner or later).
>
> MT.
That is fine
> -Original Message-
> From: Guenter Knauf
> >> but what will we all loose if then the scoreboard isnt active??
> >>
>
> > In case of single child mpm, nothing.
> > On others, jkstatus at least.
> so the scoreboard is only for collecting stats?
>
And for load balancing stats.
> > Als
Hi Mladen,
>> but what will we all loose if then the scoreboard isnt active??
>>
> In case of single child mpm, nothing.
> On others, jkstatus at least.
so the scoreboard is only for collecting stats?
> Also, we adopted the APR as mandatory, so, all platform specific code
> except JNI has to go
In my apache 2.0.48 install the version of apr is 0.95.
Glenn
On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 05:04:17PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 27 February 2004 16:13
> > To: [EMAIL P
> -Original Message-
> From: Guenter Knauf
> > Look at my today post (JK2 shm).
> > It's going to use the shm.
> > If the platform is missing APR_HAS_SHARED_MEMORY the shm
> will be disabled.
> > Also you can alway set the shm to disabled if the APR
> platform MMAP is
> > buggy.
>
>
Hi,
> Look at my today post (JK2 shm).
> It's going to use the shm.
> If the platform is missing APR_HAS_SHARED_MEMORY the shm will be disabled.
> Also you can alway set the shm to disabled if the APR platform MMAP is
> buggy.
but what will we all loose if then the scoreboard isnt active??
Guent
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Assuming that the next mod_jk2 release wants to go with the
> present APR
> (0.94) or even the CVS (pre 1.0?) then we need to kludge
> mod_jk on solaris 8 (at least) to not use APR for this bit.
>
No it's gonna be 0.95 (the one dist
> -Original Message-
> From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 27 February 2004 16:13
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
>
>
> hmm, you could check to use the old mmap code which Henri
> just has checked in again; get l
Hi Greg,
> Same sort of issue:
> [Fri Feb 27 15:12:08 2004] (error ) [jk_shm.c (163)] shm.create(): error
> creating /tmp/cr.sandwich.pfizer.com_81.shm 2117992 22 0x1f5020 Invalid
> argument
> [Fri Feb 27 15:12:08 2004] (error ) [jk_shm.c (238)] shm.create(): error
> mmapping /tmp/cr.sandwich.pf
>
> /* First make sure the file exists and is big enough
> */
> rc=apr_file_open( &file, shm->fname,
> APR_READ | APR_WRITE | APR_CREATE | APR_BINARY,
> APR_WREAD|APR_WWRITE|APR_WEXECUTE,
> globalShmPool);
Thanks Guenter,
Same sort of iss
Hi,
> Permissions should be ok. It does create a file, but with 0 size (even
> though we have set something like 16m)
> ie:
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root other 0 Feb 27 12:31
> cr.sandwich.pfizer.com_81.shm
> Compared to the old version (same config bar the name and old conector
> used)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 27 February 2004 13:20
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
>
>
> Hi Greg,
> >> look at your apr.h for APR_HAS_MMAP and tell us how this is set...
>
>
Hi Greg,
>> look at your apr.h for APR_HAS_MMAP and tell us how this is set...
> #define APR_HAS_MMAP 1
thats strange. Is is possible that there's a permission issue with creating the file?
Can you please try to configure the shm file to be created in a public writable dir,
f.e. /t
> Hi,
> > Testing the jk2-2.0.3 cvs we seem to get this error, which
> makes 2.0.3-dev
> > useable for us.
> you mean 2.0.4-dev?
>
> > I can only assume others are not seeing this (apache 1.3.26
> + mod_perl) on
> > Solaris 2.8 (sparc). Has anyone had any success with 1.3.x
> on Solaris
>
Hi,
> Testing the jk2-2.0.3 cvs we seem to get this error, which makes 2.0.3-dev
> useable for us.
you mean 2.0.4-dev?
> I can only assume others are not seeing this (apache 1.3.26 + mod_perl) on
> Solaris 2.8 (sparc). Has anyone had any success with 1.3.x on Solaris
> with the jk2-dev code?
Dear All,
Testing the jk2-2.0.3 cvs we seem to get this error, which makes 2.0.3-dev
useable for us.
I can only assume others are not seeing this (apache 1.3.26 + mod_perl) on
Solaris 2.8 (sparc). Has anyone had any success with 1.3.x on Solaris with
the jk2-dev code?
I an getting apr and apr-u
an existing
version can continued to be used. Which is our case is handy.
We might look at 4.1.3x in a few months depending on issues with 4.1.29.
Thanks anyway!
Greg
> -Original Message-
> From: David Rees [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 26 February 2004 19:33
> To: [EMA
shm->privateData=NULL;
return rc;
}
Greg
> -Original Message-
> From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 26 February 2004 11:32
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
>
>
> Hi,
>
> > Sorry, thi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> This seemed to be an issue with tomcat 4.1.24.
>
> Using 4.1.29 resolves this issue.
>
> Thanks for the pointers, especially the one to open my eyes and check
> which tomcat version I was using.
While you're at it, you should upgrade to 4.1.30 which fixes some memory
l
Hi,
> Sorry, this seems to be a bad week.
> The diff should be:
> $ diff jk_shm.c.org jk_shm.c
can you please use unified diffs:
diff -u jk_shm.c.org jk_shm.c
this is the preferred patch form with all ASF stuff...
Guenter.
---
riginal Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 26 February 2004 10:45
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: jk2 buglets
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> We have been giving the latest CVS code for mod_jk2 a
> thorough test to look
> towards usi
e?
Could someone agree/disagree and commit/not commit appropriately.
Thanks.
Greg
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 23 February 2004 16:32
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: jk2 buglets
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> We h
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 23 February 2004 21:43
> To: Tomcat Developers List
> Subject: RE: jk2 buglets II
>
>
> On Mon, February 23, 2004 1at 0:28 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> Does restarting the Tomcat instance free up the stuck processes?
> >
> > Yup.
On Mon, February 23, 2004 1at 0:28 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Does restarting the Tomcat instance free up the stuck processes?
>
> Yup. Apache seems to recover fine, as the socket gets reset.
OK, can you figure out what Tomcat is doing when these processes get
stuck? It seems that you may h
> Does restarting the Tomcat instance free up the stuck processes?
>
> -Dave
>
Yup. Apache seems to recover fine, as the socket gets reset.
Greg
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EM
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, On 2/23/2004 8:37 AM:
We seem to have another buglet with mod_jk2 2.0.2. We seem to be unable to
recreate the bug using ab, but when one of our busiest servers has been
running for a few hours we get apache children "stuck" (at times upto 100
children are blocked, which is
>
> > Which Tomcat on the remote side ?
> >
> > 3.3, 4.0, 4.1, 5.0 ?
>
> Sorry forgot that:
Sorry being an idiot. This is presently on 4.1.24.
Leave this with me... I've made a mistake and need to retest with 4.1.29.
Due to having to qualify (extensively test and document) out installs we ar
> Which Tomcat on the remote side ?
>
> 3.3, 4.0, 4.1, 5.0 ?
Sorry forgot that:
4.1.29 with jdk 1.4.2_02
Greg
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We seem to have another buglet with mod_jk2 2.0.2. We seem to be unable to
recreate the bug using ab, but when one of our busiest servers has been
running for a few hours we get apache children "stuck" (at times upto 100
children are blocked, which is how we found the iss
We seem to have another buglet with mod_jk2 2.0.2. We seem to be unable to
recreate the bug using ab, but when one of our busiest servers has been
running for a few hours we get apache children "stuck" (at times upto 100
children are blocked, which is how we found the issue as the server appeare
Hi All,
We have been running into different issues with jk2 concerning shared memory
(on Solaris 8)
Calls to the function jk2_shm_create fail logging the following in the
jk2.log file,
[Mon Feb 23 12:12:00 2004] (error ) [jk_shm.c (199)] shm.create(): error
creating /tmp/shm.file 2117728 211799
36 matches
Mail list logo
