I'm sorry if that seemed a bit harsh -- it was not meant to be. I had just read a LOT of emails from you, and that was how it came across.
Originally, the problem I was having with FreeBSD was that if I tried to LoadModule the mod_jk2.so, it said that pthread_mutex_unlock was unknown. I did a lot of investigation, and came to the conclusion that '-pthread' had to be added to the CC flags. In doing so, I have, as of yet, not been able to build mod_jk2.so anymore. Not sure why. Can't figure it out. Regarding the example you've shown. I have seen that one repeatedly, and it only applies to sockets. It does not apply to using the inprocess JNI, which I am trying to use because Tomcat is REALLY slow, even locally on the LAN. That is supposed to speed it up..... but, there is no example of configuring for it... I might have to subscribe to the dev list. I haven't, because I don't have the time to spend on it... I had previously been actively on the Ant development list, and it was very time consuming. I don't have that kind of time right now. I know, in theory, that it is supposed to be possible -- I just haven't figured out how yet. Perhaps I will join -dev so someone can tell me. I didn't realize that page was the Goal. I downloaded Tomcat, went to the online docs, and started following directions. I can get it to work standalone now, but have it shut down because it is just too slow. When I found the "why to use JK2", I thought it was more like saying "Why use JDK1.4 over JDK1.02".... Thanks for your reply, hopefully I will be able to figure this out. Malachi 10/7/2002 1:20:19 PM, "Turner, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >OK, let's be honest if we're going to post. I certainly did not say "JK2 is >in beta, not to be trusted, use something else, read the list, don't >complain about the documentation, etc etc" > >I _did_ say JK2 is "beta". That has different meanings to different people. >I'm primarily a sys-admin in charge of production servers. If someone (that >someone being from the dev or release team) posts that JK2 should be >considered "beta", that means "not fit for production yet, but probably OK >for development if you don't mind a few bugs". That's me. To others, >"beta" may mean something entirely different. To each, his/her own, make >your own decisions. > >JServ and JK have been working great for me, on high-traffic, >resource-intensive, production sites. I see no reason to jump on the JK2 >bandwagon until the codebase is more stable. Again, that's me, and perhaps >the latest version (2.0.1) is that codebase, I have no way of knowing >without testing it myself and seeing what other people do with it. >Latest/greatest isn't always the wisest. That said, use whatever you want. > >RE: the documentation, you are welcome to complain. I only posted the >replies that I posted in defense of those people on the list who have gone >above and beyond to contribute to the documentation effort, beyond that of >the dev team. These people have spent a lot of time working on their >documents, and have posted the URLs to the list many times. Robert Sowders >has regularly posted a full list of HOWTOs for various platforms and >versions to supplement the "official" documentation. These posts can be >found in a search. If you want to complain, that's cool, but your >complaints will get a lot more attention if you contribute to the effort. >It's your choice. > >Now that we've put my comments and posts back into their correct context, >let's get back to your questions (inline): > >> From: Malachi de AElfweald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 3:57 PM >> To: Turner, John; Short, Dave; tomcat-list >> Subject: Re: RE: JK2 Installation >> >> 1) I can't figure out how to get mod_jk2 to build on FreeBSD >> (using linux-sun-jdk14 and Apache2.0.42 and Tomcat 4.1.12). >> In the last 4 days, I >> somehow built mod_jk2.so once, >> but then it complained about pthreads... I figured out that I >> need to add "-pthread" >> to the CC flags.... but now it won't build the .so files -- >> even if it says it does, they >> aren't there. > >I've deleted your other posts from my InBox because I don't have access to a >FreeBSD machine at this time, even though I love FreeBSD and think its a >great OS. If you want to post the errors again, I will try to help. Give >me access to a FreeBSD machine, and I can probably get a build for you, but >no promises. > >> 2) What is the correct way to use the inprocess-jni? None of >> the examples use that. > >If it's not in the docs, your best option is to subscribe to tomcat-dev, NOT >tomcat-user, and post your questions there. JK2 is in active development, >if you are using a feature that isn't available in the docs, the BEST place >to ask your question is to ask it where the DEVELOPERS are, and that is >tomcat-dev. > >> >> 3) What is the correct way to do the worker2.properties when >> dealing with Apache VirtualHosts? >> > >RTFS (read the friendly source). Others have posted in the past how things >work for various portions of connectors, including JK, not just JK2, because >they read the source code. > >That said, it seems pretty self-explanatory to me based on the HOWTOs that >have been posted, and I don't even use JK2: > ># define the worker >[ajp13:localhost:8009] >channel=channel.un:/usr/local/tomcat/work/jk2.socket ># To use the TCP/IP socket instead, just comment out the above ># line, and uncomment the one below >#channel=channel.socket:localhost:8009 > ># Announce a "status" worker >[status:status] > ># Uri mapping >[uri:/examples/*] >#worker=ajp13:localhost:8009 >worker=ajp13:/usr/local/tomcat/work/jk2.socket > >Note the places where it says "localhost". The first place I would start, >if I was using JK2, would be to replace "localhost" with the FQDN of the >virtual host, and see what happened. But that's me. > >> Oh, and by the way, as to John's question about why I am >> using JK2... The JK/JK2 documentation >> states that it is designed for Apache2, might support JDK 1.4 >> NIO at some point, and is better >> at JNI -- which I am doing all of those things. > >That's fine, I am not a cop. It doesn't make a difference to me what you >use, except that in my opinion, it seems like wasted time and effort banging >your head trying to figure something out that may not even have a solution >yet because the guy writing the code hasn't even written it. The statement >everyone quotes about "why to use JK2" is a GOAL, not a shipped >specification sheet...it's what the developers WANT JK2 to be, not >necessarily what it is today. But, it's your time and effort, so bang >away. Or, for that matter, jump into the dev effort and write the code if >you have a need for it quicker than what the rest of the team can produce >(same goes for docs). > >Have a great day. > >John > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
