Hi,
For anyone that cares I changed the 'long's to 'unsigned short's with some
advice from Jeff Trawick.
Still looks good after a some load. It's not being hammered but it looks
ok.
-e
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Eric J. Pinnell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This tweak on
> jakarta-tomcat-connectors-jk2-2.0.2-src
Cool, thanks for the confirmation.
John
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 15:40:37 -0400 (EDT), Eric J. Pinnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I could be wrong...it was my understanding that JK2 was only supported
by
CoyoteConnector. Since both, I believe, use the AJP13 protocol, I guess
its possible that Ajp1
>
> I could be wrong...it was my understanding that JK2 was only supported by
> CoyoteConnector. Since both, I believe, use the AJP13 protocol, I guess
> its possible that Ajp13Connector could/would/might work. I know more about
> what DOES work than what DOESN'T work. ;)
It works *sorta*. It
I could be wrong...it was my understanding that JK2 was only supported by
CoyoteConnector. Since both, I believe, use the AJP13 protocol, I guess
its possible that Ajp13Connector could/would/might work. I know more about
what DOES work than what DOESN'T work. ;)
In any case, my point (perhaps
Hi,
This tweak on
jakarta-tomcat-connectors-jk2-2.0.2-src/jk/native2/common/jk_channel_socket.c
seems to fix the high TCP port issue.
Alhtough I haven't found any trouble with it yet I have never written
anything for JK2 and am unfamiliar with it's inner workings. So I
wouldn't bet the farm on
Howdy,
Well, that provided a bit of amusement for today ;) ;)
You can put in an enhancement request to use 32bits for the port number.
It's a low-priority item, not sure it will be done any time soon.
Yoav Shapira
>> >14009 works
>> >48009 doesn't. The apache error log says that it can't conne
Hi,
> >14009 works
> >48009 doesn't. The apache error log says that it can't connect.
> >According to tomcat the Connector is listening and a netstat shows the
> >port in a LISTEN state.
>
> I have a random guess harkening back to my C days: > 32767 won't work.
> Give it a shot. Has to do with 2
> John Turner wrote:
> Tomcat comes with a JK2 compatible connector enabled by default on
> port
> 8009. The class name for this connector is CoyoteConnector.
> Ajp13Connector is for JK and is incompatible with JK2...it will never
> work.
Whoa! I couldn't get the CoyoteConnector to work with 4.0.
Howdy,
>Actually I have found this not to be true (the part about you can use
any
>port). There is some kind of limitation on how high the port you use
can
>be. For example:
>
>8009 works
>14009 works
>48009 doesn't. The apache error log says that it can't connect.
>According to tomcat the Con
On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 18:27:47 +0200, Przemys³aw Korona
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thank you all, for your quick responses.
Tomcat comes with a JK2 compatible connector enabled by default on port
8009. The class name for this connector is CoyoteConnector.
You mean: org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.Coyo
Thank you all, for your quick responses.
Tomcat comes with a JK2 compatible connector enabled by default on port
8009. The class name for this connector is CoyoteConnector.
You mean: org.apache.coyote.tomcat4.CoyoteConnector ?
If you need to use JK2, you don't need to do anything to server.xml
Step 1 is unnecessary.
Tomcat comes with a JK2 compatible connector enabled by default on port
8009. The class name for this connector is CoyoteConnector.
Ajp13Connector is for JK and is incompatible with JK2...it will never work.
If you need to use JK2, you don't need to do anything to serve
Howdy,
>However in apache, there are some errors after restart:
>[Tue Jul 01 14:47:08 2003] ( info) [mod_jk2.c (284)]: mod_jk child
init
>[Tue Jul 01 14:47:08 2003] ( info) [mod_jk2.c (292)]:
mod_jk.post_config()
>init worker env
>[Tue Jul 01 14:47:08 2003] (error) [jk_logger_file.c (171)]: Ca
13 matches
Mail list logo
