dware/OS
===
Dell 8200 with 768 MB memory
Dual boot:
Fedora Core 4 2.6.13-1.1526_FC4
Windows 2000 Professional
Software
Java 1.5.0_4 from Sun
Apache 2.0.54 from RPM
Tomcat 5.5.9 from jakarta.apache.org
mod_jk 1.2.14.1 from source
Installation
Java 1.5.0
anges." Can you give me
an example of this?
-Original Message-
From: Mark Eggers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 10:54 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Mod_jk + Apache on RHEL3 gives 503 for jsp only
--- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTEC
Thanks for the tip Lyndon. It took a few tries, but I finally got it right, I
think!
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- Lyndon Tiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:01:04 -0700 (PDT)
> tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org wrote:
> > I'm very new to tomcat and apache. I've set up
> apache
> > to forward to tomcat using mod_jk. It works fine
> on
> >
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:01:04 -0700 (PDT) tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org wrote:
> I'm very new to tomcat and apache. I've set up apache
> to forward to tomcat using mod_jk. It works fine on
> the localhost, but if I try to connect through to
> tomcat from any other host I
I'm very new to tomcat and apache. I've set up apache
to forward to tomcat using mod_jk. It works fine on
the localhost, but if I try to connect through to
tomcat from any other host I get 404 file not found,
although I can connect to apache. As follows:
These work on local
i configured several html virtual hosts sites with jsps ; (apache 2.0 +
mod_jk.+ tomcat 5.5.)
- virtual hosting managed by apache (name based virtual host)
- connector ajp13 for all jsps
- if a i create in server.xml : an host www.aaa.com + context infos -->
everythink works but it's n
n the same server?
>
> #INSERT OF TOMCAT CONF PARAMETERS
> # Load mod_jk module
> # LoadModule jk_module modules/mod_jk.so
> LoadModule jk_module /etc/httpd/modules/mod_jk.so
>
> # Declare the module for
> #AddModule mod_jk.c
>
> # Where to find workers.propertie
not like the .jsp extension.
In the mod_jk log I can see the match made:
[Wed Sep 28 10:29:14 2005] [18841:2816] [debug]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_map.c (461): Attempting to map context
URI '/PI/*'
[Wed Sep 28 10:29:14 2005] [18841:2816] [debug]
map_uri_to_worker::jk_uri_worker_
order of
startup issue went away with Apache 2.0.x, but it may
still be an issue with your environment (Apache
1.3.x).
I would be interested in seeing your error logs from
mod_jk as well as seeing what catalina.out has in it
when you try to get to a web application via port
8080.
Thanks Mark,
I this helped a lot ... I'll insert comments as well... ;)
Mark Eggers wrote:
A couple of things here. I'll try to insert comment
where appropriate.
--- Don Boling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can't seem to get anything to successfully pass
though th
A couple of things here. I'll try to insert comment
where appropriate.
--- Don Boling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't seem to get anything to successfully pass
> though the mod_jk connector to the webapp.
What version of mod_jk?
> My mod_jk.conf , workers.
Hi,
I am running Tomcat5.5.9 and JDK1.5.0_04 with a Apache 1.3 webserver on
FreeBSD 5.3.
I can't seem to get anything to successfully pass though the mod_jk
connector to the webapp.
My mod_jk.conf , workers.properties are as follows.
$ less mod_jk.conf
#
JkWorkersFile /usr/
Hi Peter,
That is why I mentioned it. We deliver our static content from other
servers,
and had originally considered hiding our TCs behind apache for
'security reasons'.
After seeing the speed difference, and the fact that their isn't
really a security
difference if you just push all the
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 18:52, Mark Thomas wrote:
> KEREM ERKAN wrote:
> > Tomcat is harder to configure and -sadly- it has a far worse documentation
> > than Apache (for now).
>
> I look forward to seeing your documentation patches in Bugzilla ;)
I will certainly document how to fix my problem onc
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 13:50, Andrew Miehs wrote:
> We did some comparisons between running Tomcat 5.0 standalone, or TC
> 5.0 and Apache 2.0
>
> If you are ONLY delivering JSPs, we found that we could only deal
> with 50% of the requests when running combined Apache TC and mod
On Wed, 2005-09-14 at 13:29, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
> KEREM ERKAN wrote:
> > Apache has better directory/file restricting and handling than Tomcat
>
> better in what way? What actual *security* issue are we talking
> about -- in other words, what exploit is Tomcat susceptible to
> that Apache is
Hello,
we are using the following versions:
Apache 2.0.47
mod_jk (not mod_jk2)
Tomcat 5.5.9
The SSL-Feature is backed by openssl 0.9.7c.
We configured mod_jk to send the SSL information to the tomcat engine:
JkHTTPSIndicator HTTPS
JkSESSIONIndicator SSL_SESSION_ID
JkCIPHERIndicator SSL_CIPHER
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 8:53 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
>
> KEREM ERKAN wrote:
> > Tomcat is harder to configure and -sadly- it has a far wo
Well since I don't understand German, I don't konw how he tested.
However in my stress testing which lots of static and JSPs, I found
Apache + mod_jk performance is a littlle higher than TOMCAT only. I
configured Apache with mod_cache.
So I think only handling JSPs, TC only could be b
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Tomcat is harder to configure and -sadly- it has a far worse documentation
than Apache (for now).
I look forward to seeing your documentation patches in Bugzilla ;)
Mark
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PR
> -Original Message-
> From: Lionel Farbos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 5:49 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Cc: KEREM ERKAN
> Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
>
> On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:27:29 +0300
> KEREM ERKA
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:27:29 +0300
KEREM ERKAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Well, mod_jk > 1.2.10 seems slower than 1.2.10 when stress
> > tested. The
> > > tests completed in more time. I do not have the actual test
> > results,
> >
> > Well, mod_jk > 1.2.10 seems slower than 1.2.10 when stress
> tested. The
> > tests completed in more time. I do not have the actual test
> results,
> > because we have been using 1.2.10 for several months, maybe
> I can send
> > them when I test 1
So, I think your solution with F5 BigIPs->Tomcat is equivalent to the solution
with Apache/mod_jk->Tomcat
But the last is free
and I don't know the difference in performances between the 2 solutions.
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:14:01 +0200
Andrew Miehs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
&
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:16:59 +0300
KEREM ERKAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, mod_jk > 1.2.10 seems slower than 1.2.10 when stress tested. The tests
> completed in more time. I do not have the actual test results, because we
> have been using 1.2.10 for several months, may
Well, mod_jk > 1.2.10 seems slower than 1.2.10 when stress tested. The tests
completed in more time. I do not have the actual test results, because we
have been using 1.2.10 for several months, maybe I can send them when I test
1.2.14.
By the way mod_jk site mentions 1.2.13 as its testing vers
We run F5 BigIPs as our loadbalancers, and have seperated images, etc
onto another server
IE: i.domain.com for images, and www.domain.com for dynamic content.
F5 provides a feature call iRules to do the splitting between hosts
for you, but I would
NOT use this on a high traffic site.
Andre
ly deal
> with 50% of the requests when running combined Apache TC and mod_jk
>
> Andrew
>
>
> On Sep 14, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Lionel Farbos wrote:
>
> > I use Apache/mod_jk/Tomcat for a long time on production servers
> > with load balancing/failover (and with hi
On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 14:55:08 +0300
KEREM ERKAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mod_jk > 1.2.10 had some performance problems
> but I did not thoroughly test why.
Is is proved ? Where do you find this ?
I tested mod_jk 1.2.14 (but not stressed it) and it seems to be a good
version.
We did some comparisons between running Tomcat 5.0 standalone, or TC
5.0 and Apache 2.0
If you are ONLY delivering JSPs, we found that we could only deal
with 50% of the requests when running combined Apache TC and mod_jk
Andrew
On Sep 14, 2005, at 2:45 PM, Lionel Farbos wrote:
I use
I use Apache/mod_jk/Tomcat for a long time on production servers with load
balancing/failover (and with high traffic sites) and I'm sure it's not 30%
slower than a pure Tomcat.
I use Apache to deliver static files, manage SSL and other apache specifics
modules.
Then, Tomcat o
> -Original Message-
> From: Hassan Schroeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:30 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: mod_jk performance
>
> KEREM ERKAN wrote:
> > Apache has better directory/file restricting
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Apache has better directory/file restricting and handling than Tomcat
better in what way? What actual *security* issue are we talking
about -- in other words, what exploit is Tomcat susceptible to
that Apache is not?
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL P
Apache is easier to configure, but at a 50% performance hit for pure
JSP pages
Andrew
On Sep 14, 2005, at 2:18 PM, KEREM ERKAN wrote:
Apache has better directory/file restricting and handling than
Tomcat, it is
more customizable and it is much user/admin friendly to
configure :-) (a
harder to configure and -sadly- it has a far worse documentation
than Apache (for now).
Best regards,
Kerem
> -Original Message-
> From: Hassan Schroeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:13 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: mod
To: 'Tomcat Users List'
ari.com.tr> cc:
Subject: RE: mo
KEREM ERKAN wrote:
... I am looking to the security side of the problem and
Apache+mod_jk does its job better than only Tomcat concerning security.
How so?
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com
marc ratun wrote:
Hi,
I just read an article about webapp benchmarks [1] and they mentioned that
apache+mod_jk+tomcat is about 30% slower than pure tomcat.
This is sad. Until now I believed that the performance decrease with
apache/mod_jk would be marginal.
Why would that be sad?
30
AFAIK mod_proxy performs worse than mod_jk.
Just my 2 cents.
Kerem
> -Original Message-
> From: Bruno Georges [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 2:58 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Cc: tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re:
Marc
If the performance of your app is not acceptable using mod_jk , you could
try other alternatives and still keep apache in front to serve static
content and use other modules.
You can use apache mod_proxy to forward request on 8080 [or whatever your
run tomcat on] to tomcat without going
Well I tried both, and as my websites do not have a very high traffic (I
have approximately a total of 50 GB per month) the speed is not primarily a
concern to me, I am looking to the security side of the problem and
Apache+mod_jk does its job better than only Tomcat concerning security.
I have
Hi,
I just read an article about webapp benchmarks [1] and they mentioned that
apache+mod_jk+tomcat is about 30% slower than pure tomcat.
This is sad. Until now I believed that the performance decrease with
apache/mod_jk would be marginal.
Putting apache/mod_jk before tomcat is very nice. I
get rid of that?
>
> Tomcat 4.1.31, mod_jk 1.2.14.1, Apache httpd 1.3
> Defaultcontent is commented out in the httpd.conf
I added .htaccess file with the DefaultType text/html to the WEB application
root,
and everything seems to work fine now. Also I have servlet mapping to
the /some URI
I have a problem with the application resources, mapped with the JkMount. For
some reason httpd server threats the content-type as text/plain, and ignores
the text/html set by tomcat.
any ideas how to get rid of that?
Tomcat 4.1.31, mod_jk 1.2.14.1, Apache httpd 1.3
Defaultcontent is commented
conditions. There is
NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE.
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> Van: David Rees [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Verzonden: donderdag 1 september 2005 22:40
> Aan: Tomcat Users List
> Onderwerp: Re: Building M
On 8/30/05, Ivo Van Den Maagdenberg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >
> After the jk/native/common directory is built, make does seems not pass
> through the jk/native/apache-1.3 directory properly. I would appreciate
> some help in getting make this to work.
>
>
> Make output below:
>
> Making all in apach
Of course you are right (and for me it seems to be too late today).
So I agree: you either find out how to use different jvmRoutes in a single
instance or you try to find a workarounf with the domain attribute:
If a load balancer does not find a worker with the correct name
(=jvmRoute), it will n
Rainer Jung wrote:
The balanced workers behind lb1, lb2 etc. are allowed to have the same
name, because each load balancer has it's own list of balanced workers
with associated attributes. I expect no problem from a clash of names of
balanced workers in different balancing workers.
I must be mi
ue
>
> Guernsey, Byron (GE Consumer & Industrial) wrote:
>> I believe you can specify the jvmRoute separately by using the domain
>> attribute, but I'm not sure I see how this would help?
>>
>> Byron
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>>
03 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: mod_jk: Hot Standby and Load Balance
Due to some differences in our applications, some of them can be truly
load balanced, and some of them really cannot (yet). That is, some of
our applications can be (and have been) truly load balanced, and others
need (and o
I believe you can specify the jvmRoute separately by using the domain
attribute, but I'm not sure I see how this would help?
Byron
-Original Message-
From: Mott Leroy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 11:03 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: mod_jk
Due to some differences in our applications, some of them can be truly
load balanced, and some of them really cannot (yet). That is, some of
our applications can be (and have been) truly load balanced, and others
need (and only allow) simple failover support ("hot standby"). I noticed
that work
Hi,
An HP-UX 11.11 build for mod_jk seems to be missing from
http://www.apache.org/dist/jakarta/tomcat-connectors/jk/binaries/
I have attempted to compile mod_jk 1.2.14-1 myself. Apache 1.3.29 is my
target.
After the jk/native/common directory is built, make does seems not pass
through the jk
I tried to upgrade from 1.2.8 to 1.2.14 this week. I
must say that the behavior of mod_jk has changed quite
a bit.
Especially troublesome is that the LB seems less
equally distributing in 1.2.14 than it was in 1.2.8.
Essentilly I experienced some Tomcats die under the
load while others where
On Aug 18, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Kyle wrote:
I dunno if it's the same in Apache 1.3, but in Apache 2.x the example
httpd.conf file has a pair of small tags showing how to run
Apache under non-root user for diff. OS's.
Basically you have to start Apache as root and it will then switch
over, or
To do this irrespecitve of the modules
being present or otherwise, I just deleted the Tags.
K
Jeshua Lacock wrote:
Greetings,
I can't seem to make mod_jk connect successfully with Apache. Apache and
Tomcat both works fine on their own (apache on :80 Tomcat on :8080), but
I seem to be gettin
Greetings,
I can't seem to make mod_jk connect successfully with Apache. Apache
and Tomcat both works fine on their own (apache on :80 Tomcat on
:8080), but I seem to be getting a permissions problem using mod_jk. I
am able start Tomcat without special privileges, but when I try and
OK, thanks Mladen: I have to correct myself.
1) Traditional use
Until mod_jk 1.2.6 there was no concept of domains. You had to specify the
worker name to be exactly the same as the jvmRoute to make sticky sessions
work. This way of configuring stickyness is wel known to mod_jk users.
2) I
hand if it can
only be used reliably with clusters.
After reading the documentation
(http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/connectors-doc/config/workers.html), I
got the idea that using the domain property with only one worker
wouldn't be a trick but another way tell mod_jk which jvmRoute to use:
&
Edgar Alves wrote:
Hi,
I'm using the domain property in the same situation as the one
discussed in this thread. Any reason why I shouldn't use the domain
property and rely on the worker names instead?
Domain is supposed to be used with multiple workers sharing the
same jvmRoute having session
he worker names.
>
>You should check, that the URLs produced by your application include the
>";jsessionid=<32Characters>." or - in case you use cookies - the
>same info is in your session cookie.
>
>mod_jk then automatically strips the part from the session
>
Hello
I am getting odd behavior w/TC4.1.30 and the
configurations below.
www.vhost01.com & www.vhost01.com/hello.jsp work and
as expected
www.vhost02.com & www.vhost02.com/sb/hello.jsp work
NOT as expected. As implied in the server.xml
snipette the tomcat serving directory is the typical
/webapp
"bl_worker_dev" use "dev_alexis" and instead
of "bl_worker_noah" use "noah_alexis" as the worker names.
You should check, that the URLs produced by your application include the
";jsessionid=<32Characters>." or - in case you use cookies - the
same in
ot;noah_alexis" as the worker names.
You should check, that the URLs produced by your application include the
";jsessionid=<32Characters>." or - in case you use cookies - the
same info is in your session cookie.
mod_jk then automatically strips the part from the session
ident
Before I go gripe too, too much, let me just say that the mod_jk
documentation has improved immensely since I start looking into it. Some
of it might be simplied by the fact that I no longer consider jk2 in the
picture which seemed to be adding some confusion.
I don't know who is respon
:
worker.bl_worker_dev.domain=dev_alexis
worker.bl_worker_noah.domain=noah_alexis
-- Edgar Alves
Mott Leroy wrote:
Hi -
I'm unable to get mod_jk load balancing working. The usual mod_jk
setup works just fine, but using a load balancing worker however, is
not. [Oddly, my webserver crashed d
Try adding these two lines to worker.properties:
worker.bl_worker_dev.domain=dev_alexis
worker.bl_worker_noah.domain=noah_alexis
-- Edgar Alves
Mott Leroy wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I'm unable to get mod_jk load balancing working. The usual mod_jk
> setup works just fine, but using
Hi -
I'm unable to get mod_jk load balancing working. The usual mod_jk setup
works just fine, but using a load balancing worker however, is not.
[Oddly, my webserver crashed during testing of this, but that could very
well be unrelated]
The problem is with user sessions. The inst
proxy_ajp is mod_jk successor in Apache2.1/2.2 core.
You can find more info:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.1/mod/mod_proxy.html
http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.1/mod/mod_proxy_ajp.html
http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.1/mod/mod_proxy_balancer.html
Thx, Xuekun
On 8/17/05, Christine Ho <[EM
Hi,
Can somebody tell me what the difference between
the proxy_ajp and mod_jk is.
thanks,
Christine
--- Mladen Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Xuekun Hu wrote:
> > Hi,
> >>From performance point, which connector will be
> used for TOMCAT
> > intergration
Xuekun Hu wrote:
Hi,
From performance point, which connector will be used for TOMCAT
intergration with Apache? proxy_ajp or mod_jk?
I read some docs which said mod_jk should have better performance than
proxying. While proxy_ajp in Apache2.1 is an addition to the mod_proxy
and uses Tomcat&#
Hi,
>From performance point, which connector will be used for TOMCAT
intergration with Apache? proxy_ajp or mod_jk?
I read some docs which said mod_jk should have better performance than
proxying. While proxy_ajp in Apache2.1 is an addition to the mod_proxy
and uses Tomcat's AJP protoc
Hi,
I've been following this thread for a bit and can offer some of my
painfully gained insights. I have Apache, tomcat 5.0.28, mod_jk and
SSL.
This is not a real fix, just my workarounds.
It drove me nuts forever until I figured out that Apache webserver does
not successful apply re
It was something simple. I didn't have to mod_jk directive setup on the
virtual host with ssl.
Stanczak Group wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Stanczak Group wrote:
I'm not familiar with mod_jk, but in Tomcat when using SSL I can put
in a security constraint and it will redirect t
Mladen Turk wrote:
Stanczak Group wrote:
I'm not familiar with mod_jk, but in Tomcat when using SSL I can put
in a security constraint and it will redirect to a secure connection,
so that's why I'm making it sound like a redirect.
Hmm.
You are still unclear.
Seems to
test time
Stanczak Group wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
Stanczak Group wrote:
I'm not familiar with mod_jk, but in Tomcat when using SSL I can put
in a security constraint and it will redirect to a secure
connection, so that's why I'm making it sound like a redirect.
Hmm
Mladen Turk wrote:
Stanczak Group wrote:
I'm not familiar with mod_jk, but in Tomcat when using SSL I can put
in a security constraint and it will redirect to a secure connection,
so that's why I'm making it sound like a redirect.
Hmm.
You are still unclear.
Seems to
Stanczak Group wrote:
I'm not familiar with mod_jk, but in Tomcat when using SSL I can put in
a security constraint and it will redirect to a secure connection, so
that's why I'm making it sound like a redirect.
Hmm.
You are still unclear.
Seems to me that you are saying that
I'm not familiar with mod_jk, but in Tomcat when using SSL I can put in
a security constraint and it will redirect to a secure connection, so
that's why I'm making it sound like a redirect. But the real issue is
when I access the url for example http://www.myapp.com/thisapp it w
Stanczak Group wrote:
Well, maybe I've just make a mistake somewhere. I looked at my
jsp-examples/ url work with ssl and without in mod_jk. Where should I
look to see why this one works but my app doesn't?
Stanczak Group wrote:
I know this has been asked, but the all the emails a
Well, maybe I've just make a mistake somewhere. I looked at my
jsp-examples/ url work with ssl and without in mod_jk. Where should I
look to see why this one works but my app doesn't?
Stanczak Group wrote:
I know this has been asked, but the all the emails and on-line docs
don'
I know this has been asked, but the all the emails and on-line docs
don't seem to make sense to me. What I have is this. Apache, Tomcat,
Mod_JK all running and working on my server. The SSL on Apache is
working as well. All I want to do is have certain urls use SSL on
Apache. So when you
x27;s mod_jk
connector.
It is always the local one that serves my request. Cannot get my remote
Tomcat to serve any.
http://localhost/jkstatus also gives a error page
Have workers.properties and all configured but ...
Doing a search on google found Tomcat + mod_JK documentation take me to
T
Hi,
I am trying load balancing with Tomcat 5, fornted with Apache's mod_jk
connector.
It is always the local one that serves my request. Cannot get my remote
Tomcat to serve any.
http://localhost/jkstatus also gives a error page
Have workers.properties and all configured but ...
Do
ects! he's even jumping to /html/index.jsp - and for
> some reason, tomcat redirects back to / - and than back again to
> /html/index.jsp. That absolutly makes no sense! /index.jsp contains a
> simple redirect - and /html/index.jsp is a simple page.
Well, i recompiled apache, but didn
Hi,
often, Firefox tellst me, that the redirect limit is execeeded when
surfing one of my pages.
So i tried wget, and look at the result:
$ LANG=C wget www.mysite.com
--05:29:04-- http://www.mysite.com/
=> `index.html.1'
Resolving www.mysite.com... 80.70.176.140
Connecting to www.mys
Seale, Deryl wrote:
Thanks for the information, Jon. I finally realized this when I examined the
two different cookies Tomcat was setting: the first was marked secure, and the
second was not.
I followed the threads you provided, and one of the respondents hinted that
this behavior may change.
still enforce this rule?
thanks.
-d.
-Original Message-
From: Jon Wingfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 5:23 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: sessions dropping with mod_ssl, mod_jk, mod_rewrite rules
I'm pretty sure Tomcat doesn't allow a
kes.properties file. I've followed the recommendations I've seen online
regarding connector configuration, but perhaps there is something subtle that
is missing, or our rewrite rules are screwed up. Any insight is appreciated.
thanks.
-d.
httpd.conf (irrelevant sections omitted
Forgot to add, we're using Tomcat 5.0.28, mod_jk 1.2.14, and apache 1.3.33.
thanks.
-d.
-Original Message-
From: Seale, Deryl
Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 11:48 AM
To: tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: sessions dropping with mod_ssl, mod_jk, mod_rewrite rules
Hi, there. I
ns omitted):
# Load mod_jk
#
LoadModulejk_module libexec/mod_jk.so
# Configure mod_jk
#
JkWorkersFile "conf/workers.properties"
JkLogFile "logs/mod_jk.log"
JkLogLevel info
JkShmFile "logs/jk.shm"
JkShmSize 10M
# Map mo
Frédéric Viollet a écrit :
Hi all,
Is anyone aware of a problem with using frames and mod_jk on windows?
I'm using Apache 1.3.33 - mod_jk 1.2.14 and I've got the folowing
problem:
I'm trying to access an HTML page with frames in it. Only the first
frame is correctly displa
Hi all,
Is anyone aware of a problem with using frames and mod_jk on windows?
I'm using Apache 1.3.33 - mod_jk 1.2.14 and I've got the folowing problem:
I'm trying to access an HTML page with frames in it. Only the first
frame is correctly displayed;
the other says "Inter
You want to use mod_jk. JK2 has been deprecated and is no longer in
active development.
On 8/3/05, MC Moisei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I thought the jk2 is newer... but I can be wrong...
>
> MC
>
>
> >From: Luis Torres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply
I thought the jk2 is newer... but I can be wrong...
MC
From: Luis Torres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List"
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: mod_jk or jk2??
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:47:42 -0500
Hello everyone,
I see lots of posts saying that they are using
Hello everyone,
I see lots of posts saying that they are using or implementing jk2? For
what I understand, that has been replaced by mod_jk... so which one is
better or what is recommended??
I also have found better documentation related to jk2 so that adds to
the puzzle.
Regards,
Luis
Hi,
Is this issue described below familiar to anyone who is really
knowledgable of how mod_jk works?
Thank you,
Edmon
Edmon Begoli wrote:
We've noticed with two versions of mod_jk we've been using (1.2.5 and
one older) that if one of the machines
hosting load balanced t
Frédéric Viollet wrote:
Hi everybody,
I'm using mod_jk - 1.2.14.1 and apache - 1.3.19
I would like to link statically mod_jk in Apache in Windows environment.
Has anyone already managed this?
The configure --with-apache command works fine for Solaris and AIX; and
it compiles and links al
Hi everybody,
I'm using mod_jk - 1.2.14.1 and apache - 1.3.19
I would like to link statically mod_jk in Apache in Windows environment.
Has anyone already managed this?
The configure --with-apache command works fine for Solaris and AIX; and
it compiles and links alright...but I don't
1 - 100 of 4830 matches
Mail list logo
