Actually, its the JNI configuration that doesn't work correctly. I can get jk2 to work just fine with sockets (like your config file indicates you are using), but the JNI shared library is bad, as Rahul recently discovered. "Chong, Kwong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm still fairly new to the tomcat world, but we have Apache 2.0.43 working with tomcat 4.1.18 via mod jk2 running on solaris 8
We initially ran up tomcat with apache 1.3.27 running mod jk, but found that mod jk wasn't working well with high loads, possibly due to the way the jk connector establishes connections with tomcat. workers2.properties looks like #---- workers2.properties # Shared memory handling. Needs to be set. [shm] file=/[location of shm]/shm.file size=1048576 # Define channels [channel.socket:socket1] port=11111 host=host1 tomcatId=tc1 [channel.socket:socket2] port=11112 host=host2 tomcatId=tc2 # Define workers [ajp13:worker1] channel=channel.socket:socket1 [ajp13:worker2] channel=channel.socket:socket2 # Define a Load Balanced Worker [lb:LB] worker=ajp13:worker1 worker=ajp13:worker2 # Status page [status:status] # Uri mapping [uri:/*.jsp] worker=lb:LB [uri:/*.do] worker=lb:LB [uri:/jk2status] worker=status:status We are now in the midst of tuning the server tomcat runs on to try to minimise context switching, so if anyone has worked through a problem like that, insight to the solution will be much appreciated :) Kwong. -----Original Message----- From: liug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 12 February 2003 6:45 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: mod_jk2 vs. the others compile of mod_jk2 is not an issue. it is pretty straight forward. but whether you can config and make it work is another story :) If you are one of those lucky Microsoft Windows user, I do see some success posts. On Unix, no one got JNI in process working with mod_jk2 (isn't that one of the main reason you want to use mod_jk2 over mod_jk?) You may be able to get Unix domain socket working if you follow Paul's suggestion: The work-around for that was to put all the jar files from $TOMCAT/server/lib in $TOMCAT/commons/lib -- this by-passes the class loader hierarchy (defeating the purpose of the classloader hierarchy's security mechanisms) but it allows the unix domain sockets to work. The problem exists since earlier versions of 4.1.x. This makes me wondering if mod_jk2 is being actively worked on. frank Mike Jackson wrote: > I've got mod_jk working, not mod_jk2. But I did finally get mod_jk2 > compiled (between myself and another). I asked the other guy to take notes > so we could repeat it with a > howto in mind, but he hasn't given the notes to me yet. > If someone has a "sample" mod_jk2 configuration using a vanilla apache2.x > and tomcat4.x then I can add that to the end of it. When I get it that is. > The old version of mod_jk I was able to get to compile by just making a > minor code tweak, but with the new ant build I'm not sure where it's at. I > may even have it compiled, but I haven't (to be completely honest) looked. > Been too busy with work to play lately. > --mikej > -=----- > mike jackson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 11:23 AM >> To: 'Tomcat Users List' >> Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) >> >> >> >> If you've got it working, stick with it, and while you're at it, >> how about a >> config HOWTO? Lots of JK2 problems recently on the list. ;) >> >> John >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Mike Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 2:18 PM >> > To: Tomcat Users List >> > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) >> > >> > >> > Hmm, ok, seems like the consensus is to use mod_jk for now. >> > Now I'll just >> > have to get that to compile under unixware (not the easiest >> > thing in the >> > world). >> > >> > Also, on a somewhat related thought, is there anyone else out >> > there running >> > apache+tomcat on unixware? I'd like to compare problems from >> > time to time. >> > >> > --mikej >> > -=----- >> > mike jackson >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 11:13 AM >> > > To: 'Tomcat Users List' >> > > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > JK2 is technically best with Apache 2 because of the pre-fork issue. >> > > >> > > JK works with both Apache 1.3 and 2. >> > > >> > > John >> > > >> > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Mike Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 2:06 PM >> > > > To: Tomcat Users List >> > > > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Should I be using mod_jk with apache 2.x? I thought that mod_jk2 >> > > > was for apache 2.x mostly, and that mod_jk was geared more towards >> > > > use with apache 1.3.x. >> > > > >> > > > For that matter I've had all sorts of fun getting mod_jk2 to work, >> > > > but mod_jk is easy... >> > > > >> > > > --mikej >> > > > -=----- >> > > > mike jackson >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > >> > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > > From: Turner, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 10:54 AM >> > > > > To: 'Tomcat Users List' >> > > > > Subject: RE: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp >> > random error) >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > I wouldn't use mod_webapp at all. >> > > > > >> > > > > JK (mod_jk) has lots of features over mod_webapp: >> > > > > >> > > > > - ability to load balance >> > > > > - ability to separate static content from dynamic content >> > > > > - and more, search the archives, this is a FAQ >> > > > > >> > > > > JK2 is the "newer" version of JK. It's where the dev team >> > > > is focusing its >> > > > > efforts. So, going forward, the recommended choices are mod_jk >> > > > > and mod_jk2. >> > > > > Which you use is up to you. >> > > > > >> > > > > John >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > > > From: Diego Algorta Casamayou >> > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:50 PM >> > > > > > To: Tomcat Users List >> > > > > > Subject: mod_jk2 vs. the others (was: mod_webapp random error) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Any experience with mod_jk2? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Does it everything mod_jk and mod_webapp can do? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > If it's newer, why should I use mod_jk or mod_webapp instead >> > > > > > of mod_jk2? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thank you >> > > > > > >> > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> > > > > > From: "Chris Davies" >> > > > > > To: "Tomcat Users List" >> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 12:56 PM >> > > > > > Subject: Re: mod_webapp random error >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I've never had this problem with mod_webapp, it sounds >> > > > very strange. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > If you possibly can, switch to mod_jk. I think I'm right in >> > > > > > saying that >> > > > > > most >> > > > > > > people consider mod_webapp as hackish, and certainly >> > > > > > inferior to jk/jk2. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I find it useful because it is so well documented I can >> > > > > > extend it with >> > > > > > very >> > > > > > > little effort, but it may not be suited to a production >> > > > environment. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > > C.Davies >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Quoting Diego Algorta Casamayou >> > : >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Yes, it's listening on port 8008. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > The thing is that it WORKS OK "almost everytime" :-/ BUT, >> > > > > > sometimes and >> > > > > > > > without apparent reason it stops working and I have to >> > > > > > restart apache >> > > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > tomcat to get it working again. SOMETIMES it works just >> > > > > > waiting about 10 >> > > > > > > > of >> > > > > > > > 15 seconds and reloading the page. It's really annoying >> > > > > > because it's a >> > > > > > > > random behavior. Sometimes I can reproduce the error when >> > > > > > I reppeatidly >> > > > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > quickly (sure bad english writing) reload the page. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > This is my server.xml file (real IP replaced with >> > > > xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Bytes >> > > > > > > > DAC >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.sensis.com.au A leading Australian advertising, information and directories business. www.yellowpages.com.au www.whitepages.com.au www.citysearch.com.au www.whereis.com.au www.telstra.com.au This email and any attachments are intended only for the use of the recipient and may be confidential and/or legally privileged. Sensis Pty Ltd disclaims liability for any errors, omissions, viruses, loss and/or damage arising from using, opening or transmitting this email. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, interfere with, disclose, copy or retain this email and you should notify the sender immediately by return email or by contacting Sensis Pty Ltd by telephone on [+61 3 9201 4888] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Todo lo que quieres saber de Estados Unidos, Am�rica Latina y el resto del Mundo. Vis�ta Yahoo! Noticias.
