Re: Change of status code for ClientAbortExceptions - bug?

2017-08-22 Thread Mark Thomas
On 21/08/17 18:22, icyerasor wrote: > markt wrote >> On 06/06/17 15:08, Thomas Eliassen wrote: >> ... >> >> I think we are going to have to choose a "least bad" option here. Given >> that Tomcat has used 200 in the past and that there is the option to add >> %{javax.servlet.error.exception}r to

Re: Change of status code for ClientAbortExceptions - bug?

2017-08-21 Thread icyerasor
markt wrote > On 06/06/17 15:08, Thomas Eliassen wrote: > ... > > I think we are going to have to choose a "least bad" option here. Given > that Tomcat has used 200 in the past and that there is the option to add > %{javax.servlet.error.exception}r to the access log I think reverting > the change

Re: Change of status code for ClientAbortExceptions - bug?

2017-06-07 Thread Mark Thomas
On 06/06/17 23:11, Konstantin Kolinko wrote: > 2017-06-07 0:10 GMT+03:00 Mark Thomas : >> On 06/06/17 15:08, Thomas Eliassen wrote: >>> >>> Is there some way to avoid having it logged as a 500 in the access log then? >> >> At the moment, no. And my preference is to avoid creating

Re: Change of status code for ClientAbortExceptions - bug?

2017-06-06 Thread Konstantin Kolinko
2017-06-07 0:10 GMT+03:00 Mark Thomas : > On 06/06/17 15:08, Thomas Eliassen wrote: >> >> Is there some way to avoid having it logged as a 500 in the access log then? > > At the moment, no. And my preference is to avoid creating new > configuration options unless we have to. > >>

Re: Change of status code for ClientAbortExceptions - bug?

2017-06-06 Thread Mark Thomas
On 06/06/17 15:08, Thomas Eliassen wrote: > > Is there some way to avoid having it logged as a 500 in the access log then? At the moment, no. And my preference is to avoid creating new configuration options unless we have to. > ClientAbortExceptions are so frequent that it really pollutes the

Re: Change of status code for ClientAbortExceptions - bug?

2017-06-06 Thread Thomas Eliassen
Is there some way to avoid having it logged as a 500 in the access log then? ClientAbortExceptions are so frequent that it really pollutes the access logs, drowns out 500s actually caused by the server side application, and makes monitoring and debugging based on the access logging a lot

Re: Change of status code for ClientAbortExceptions - bug?

2017-05-30 Thread Mark Thomas
Another one I failed to send to the list first time around... On 29/05/17 08:26, Thomas Eliassen wrote: > Hi, > > Since https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60718 (r1783148 in > tc8.5.x), ClientAbortExceptions are logged in the access log as status 500, > changed from the previous