. And
unfortunately, these special files do need jsp code, and must be more than
just html.
Thank you,
-Raiden
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
don't see an easy way to do that. The files must be
dynamic, as they will be edited many times over the lifetime of the
current web application.
So far, symbolic linking out of the web application seems to be the only
way we have found to really do this.
Thank you,
-Raiden
link before the pages that need the link are accessed, but AFTER
the war file has been exploded.
I don't like it much, but it's the best solution we have at the moment.
Thank you,
-Raiden
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
solution.
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
to include jsp code
outside of the webapp that will be compiled runtime?
Thanks,
-Raiden
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
way to include jsp code dynamically besides the jsp:include
method? If there was some way to do it in the code, then we could just
load the jsp code from a file store of some sort.
Thanks,
-Raiden
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
... with the allowLinking flag. Then,
I can access jsp files outside of the web app by following the symbolic
link out. I just have to make sure that the symbolic link is recreated
before Tomcat starts up. (Or actually, before any jsp's are compiled.)
-Raiden
the source for 5.0.28. Is there a
way for me to build without grabbing the updates? (And am I right in
assuming that the updates it's grabbing are those that are in place for
5.0.29, the current beta?)
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
passfile: /home/synn/.cvspass
[cvs] cvs server: cannot find module `-rTOMCAT_5_0_28' - ignored
[cvs] cvs [checkout aborted]: cannot expand modules
Thanks,
-Raiden
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004, Mark Thomas wrote:
Adding tag=TOMCAT_5_0_28 to each of the ant cvs tasks in the build.xml that
does
I removed the TOMCAT_5_0_28 from two of the checkouts... the two that are
under checkout.depends
That seemed to get rid of the errors. Hope it was the right thing to do.
=P
Thanks,
-Raiden
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Mark,
That sounds like it would do the trick
/49789.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg83724.html
http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/tomcat-devel/2001-October/024544.html
Thanks,
-Raiden Johnson
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004, Steffen Heil wrote:
Hi
Actually, I'm a big advocate against staying in HTTPS, because
option for this, but hopefully I will soon. =P
Thanks,
-Raiden Johnson
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, David Wall wrote:
I don't know the answer to that. It's unlikely, though. You could put
something like Apache in the front and use URL rewriting, which can
basically force any URL with a given pattern
be. Apache is likely much better than
tomcat in serving static content, and even though tomcat has lots of
security, I feel much more comfortable with Apache being at the front
door, because of its extremely wide use and history.
-Raiden Johnson
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Angus Mezick wrote:
I have
is reached? Do Apache connections wait for a turn, or is an error
immediately returned? (With the older mod_jk, an error was returned...
which is pretty undesirable.)
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
I have not run benchmarks, no... thus the likely... which is based on past
articles and discussions.
However, here's an interesting/fairly recent thread:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-userm=106036177509367w=2
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, Steffen Heil wrote:
Hi
Is the answer to this, that the associated connector on Tomcat's end just
allows as many connections as needed? And you don't get to (nor want to)
define a max limit?
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I currently have one Apache instance talking
MaxProcessors set to
400?
Thanks,
-Raiden Johnson
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Montz, James C. (James Tower) wrote:
I believe the equivalent is maxProcessors
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 11:41 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject
for a
connection. Was wondering what the situation is for mod_jk2.)
Thanks,
-Raiden Johnson
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So would it be correct to assume that you want MaxProcessors to be set to
the maximum number of Apache clients (MaxClients) that you can have
connecting to it at once
, but
not for the 8009 connector).
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
://10.0.0.1:3306/net_basic?autoReconnect=true/value
/parameter
/ResourceParams
/Context
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
On Sat, 9 Oct 2004, D'Alessandro, Arthur wrote:
A suggestion, include the ROOT.xml as context.xml under META-INF, tomcat
will create it under your host as ROOT.xml when
very much for your help!
-Raiden Johnson
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004, D'Alessandro, Arthur wrote:
Try changing the docbase from ROOT TO ROOT.war.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon Oct 11 13:39:17 2004
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject
?
Thank you,
-Raiden
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004, D'Alessandro, Arthur wrote:
You only need to get rid of the cached version if you made changes to it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon Oct 11 14:05:58 2004
To: Tomcat Users List
(HttpServlet.java:689)
javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:802)
Any ideas?
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, sounds good.
One thing I noticed with the context.xml, is that it only seems to work
when it's packaged
Never mind... this was my mistake. It is working just fine. Thanks
again, for the help!
-Raiden Johnson
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, I spoke too soon... about it working in production.
While it's true that the application does load in Tomcat, and everything
it in my
deployment script.
What happened since Tomcat 5.0.19 to make it not expand the ROOT.war
archive at the same time that it's processing a new ROOT.xml file?
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
is appreciated.
Thank you,
-Raiden Johnson
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 17:23:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Is there a secureCookie type of paramater for Tomcat 4.1.12?
Hello,
Tomcat 3.3.2 has a secureCookie paramater that restores the old behavior
of not making the sessionId
Ok, actually that second rule doesn't really work properly either (because
if someone posts their contact information, that redirect doesn't allow
the post to go through properly). Anyone have any ideas on how to do this
the right way?
Thanks!
-Raiden
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Actually, it looks like I just figured it out. I need to use [PT] instead
of just [P]. Not sure why it worked with just [P] in Apache 1.3.
Thanks,
-Raiden
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok, actually that second rule doesn't really work properly either (because
if someone
request, and the true page is hidden from them?
Thanks!
-Raiden Johnson
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
();
session.setAttribute(sessionLock, new Object());
}
public void sessionDestroyed(HttpSessionEvent se) {
return;
}
}
Thanks,
Raiden
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands
Hello Tim,
Thanks for the tip... it worked! Upon futher investigation, it appears
that java.lang.Object is not serializable, because that would lend to all
objects being inherently serializable.
-Raiden
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Tim Funk wrote:
What if you change new Object() to new String
that you
use URL rewriting everywhere that you have a link, redirect or a form
post. That way, if their cookies are off, you will still maintain the
session with the user.
-Raiden
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Stefan Radzom wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Raiden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: How to synchronize based on session? (Prevent
multiple submissions of forms)
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Stefan Radzom wrote:
IMHO, Justin's proposal will not work
think
it's the first time this page is being processed, and both run the order
processing code.
Thank you,
Raiden
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
is created?
Thanks,
Raiden
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Stefan Radzom wrote:
For security reasons your are not handed the internal
org.apache.catalina.session.StandardSession . Instead, the implicit session
you are trying to synchronize holds a reference to
org.apache.catalina.session.StandardSessionFacade
that object in the session in the first place? (It's almost a circular
problem).
Here's the thread:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg41219.html
Thanks again for your help!
-Raiden
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Raiden wrote:
Hi Stefan,
Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense, except
to run here
try {
Thread.sleep(30);
}
catch (InterruptedException ie) {
cat.error(AutomaticProcess - + ie.toString());
}
}
}
}
-Raiden
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Ciramella, EJ wrote:
Yeah, but the more
I know starting threads off of other threads can be a big problem,
especially if many of your requests are spawning new ones. But the
message I just posted to you would create one thread one time, at
startup... and I'm not sure why that would be a problem.
-Raiden
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003
guessed, we've been avoiding the single-threaded
servlet model, because we do have such a large volume of
simultaneous accesses on these pages.
Thanks again,
-Raiden
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Justin Ruthenbeck wrote:
If your code worked like this:
1: if (session.getAttribute(LOCKED_ATTR) == LOCKED
, the
HttpSessionListener sounds like what I'm looking for.
Thanks for your help,
-Raiden
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Stefan Radzom wrote:
IMHO, Justin's proposal will not work since the servlet container may choose
to pool multiple instances of the same servlet class and assign an incoming
request
thread ever accessing that servlet at a given time
(which would also imply that there is only one instance of the servlet).
Thanks,
-Raiden
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The HttpSessionListener worked beautifully. Thanks to everyone that
helped with this!
-Raiden
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Stefan Radzom wrote:
IMHO, Justin's proposal will not work since the servlet container may choose
to pool multiple instances of the same servlet class and assign an incoming
at once. But, I do get them quite a bit during regular runtime
as well.)
Thanks,
Raiden
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a way to turn this (non-harmful?) messages off, or am I the only
one getting a server log full of them?
Thanks,
-Raiden
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 20:22:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Raiden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Tomcat Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED
there was some sort of option like that currently in use.
-Raiden
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003, Bill Barker wrote:
Raiden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Just as a followup, even though all of the below still holds true, I did
find out my problem with Apache 2.0.43
to trick it into sending index.jsp as
default to Tomcat.
Does anyone know how to fix either of those strange behaviors? Or BETTER
yet, has anyone had the hanging problem with Apache 2.0.43 and mod_jk2,
and found a way to fix it?
Thanks,
-Raiden
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Almost forgot... I'm using Tomcat 4.1.18.
-Raiden
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Raiden wrote:
Hello,
I wanted to get Apache 2.0.43 and mod_jk2 working. They seemed to setup
fine, and handle requests just great. But after a while, Apache starts
hanging on every other request. I tried mod_jk
.
But how do I do this when the jsp files are not on the same file system?
Thanks,
Raiden
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
who has
more knowledge of tomcat's internal workings than myself will figure out
the proper way to patch this.
-Raiden
(and I will be forever grateful to anyone that can do this!)
From: Bill Barker
Date: 2003-01-10 7:42:35
As the person that implemented the 3.3.2 behavior
.
Apache Tomcat/4.1.12
It looks like the %3b was translated for (or by?) Tomcat when there was
no speific page given. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Raiden
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Bill Barker wrote:
Try encoding the ';' as follows:
%
String refresh =
response.encodeURL(https://www.myserver.com/login
machines, which means the
other machines should also work with this method once I find out what
is configured incorrectly.
Thanks Bill!
-Raiden
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Raiden wrote:
Hello,
This ALMOST seems to work. I can't tell if I'm having a problem with
Apache, or it's a problem
for the normal
query string)
This seems like a pretty rough solution. Does anyone have any better
ideas?
Thanks,
Raiden
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
the request?
Thanks,
Raiden
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Bill Barker wrote:
Try encoding the ';' as follows:
%
String refresh =
response.encodeURL(https://www.myserver.com/login/index.jsp;);
int jssid = refresh.indexOf(;jsessionid);
if(jssid 0) {
refresh = refesh.substring(0, jssid) + %3b
://www.myserver.com are able to maintain
the same session... but I can't understand why... especially since Tomcat
and Netscape and IE have aggreed to send the session cookie on both
protocols, when using cookies to maintain sessions.
Thanks,
Raiden
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
A quick addendum... is there a setting somewhere that I need to explicitly
state that my server is www.myserver.com, and therefore regardless of
protocol (HTTP or HTTPS), all links at this server should be encoded with
the session id?
Thanks again,
Raiden
On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Raiden wrote
following similar
security precautions as to those that I outlined below, or you may end up
the victim of session hijacking, which this code was meant to prevent in
the first place.
-Raiden
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Bill Barker wrote:
Raiden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Hello,
Anyone have any ideas if there is a solution to this problem in 4.1.12, or
are we better off reverting back to Tomcat 3.3.2 to restore the old
behavior of not making the sessionId cookie a secure cookie if the session
was created under https?
Thanks in advance!
-Raiden
On Mon, 25 Nov
http
pages... and I really don't want to start encrypting these non-sensitive
pages. (But, I do want the user logged in before they can access these
pages.)
Does something like the secureCookie parameter exist in 4.1.12?
Thanks,
Raiden
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
58 matches
Mail list logo
