-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 All,
I've been playing around with mod_jk's status screens a lot lately. I also recently upgraded from Apache httpd 2.2 to Apache httpd 2.4 and the hostname shown at the top of the page changed from the "real" hostname to the masquerading hostname (more on that in a second) and I was wondering what else was going on. First off, I have a load-balancer with 3 web servers behind it. Each individual web server has its own distinct hostname (the "real" hostname) like foo.example.com, bar.example.com, etc. plus, when you contact it through the load-balancer, it thinks it's "www.example.com" of course. Everything seems to work fine. These days, the jk-status page always says "JK Status Manager for www.example.com:443" when I visit the page, no matter which back-end server I get by entering https://foo.example.com/jk-status. When I connect to an individual server, I use HTTPS of course, so I get the "_default_:443" virtual host which makes sense. My conf/hostname.conf has "ServerName www.example.com" and no server aliases, and my conf.d/ssl.conf has no ServerName and no ServerAlias. (This is on Amazon Linux, which is essentially CentOS, and I'm using package-managed versions of httpd so this is the layout they have). I'm assuming that, since I have no ServerAlias for my :443 VirtualHost, that's where the name at the top of the page comes from. Can anyone confirm that? It would be nice if the page advertised my "real" hostname instead of the generic one. That is, I'd like to see "JK Status Manager for foo.example.com:443" instead of "www.example.com:443". Would adding a ServerAlias in either hostname.conf (which I believe is loaded at the top-level configuration) or in ssl.conf inside the VirtualHost achieve that? Next, I have a question about the workers. I believe - but I'm not sure - that each worker is unique to the server as a whole, and not to just a single VirtualHost, right? That is, my jk_workers.properties file contains a series of worker definitions and I can use them in any VirtualHost I like. If I reference the same worker from two different VirtualHosts, I just get two references to the same worker, right? The reason I ask is that I don't have the jk-status page available for users coming from the load-balancer. I want to make sure that when I disable a worker when looking at the :443 jk-status page that I'm disabling it across all VirtualHosts in the server. (The load-balancer uses a different VirtualHost, and it's tough to convince the load-balancer to pick a specific back-end server to direct my commands to, so... it's kind of important that the above be true.) Can anyone confirm that the workers are shared? I think it would be very difficult to administer if the workers were not shared, but I wanted to be absolutely sure. Thanks, - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJUXUHUAAoJEBzwKT+lPKRYC/oQAJ1XBBuGKbdqTbSPIt99/ZIa vmj8m16TGQACuSeAcprBUXATJJ0yjgPpuE99gn8uTnwIs9D7nGIifWtCV2JC5x6Q TZWFjqEHZpftoPuycvHg42DpnTEG53Pjxs3bdms+OLADOSZTFu3fKsbIuVwaraL8 /IHfBhanP/mgNXz5si/hVwDOb8zVcWCj2vGe/xIgQNJ6A7DFSU+MVMXxBFGmvdBh qvoMsm8pBlZ9VDsHLwgRikoP0pyTfdXAR9EzEwS9pDaBn+CiffPC3vXY2unBxCj6 Nm5xoA5VPihJGbTw2VVpHSz9GOjq7rFdwqQEWCl1t2TbxfiyV5+Y0FUDHWGMwlhb FUjdFw7zgr4xTSLdbrQTVsOUhsimgbqvycTQC3qOKL+Gd4HW0onct1a0qGfJfIKG IW2KreY7ft6/RTM6AGahRUUPB/c45W3L04T4BY/FIIJA0rcmvq7ihli0ngCGinQM /KoTRGOYj3geYWdwfpdZAOcCIIWyoo+qtUg1dNUN7nrfRMvINj51ETmvRYyLOamP o1d5FcGpfP6rTU2llZOZ9qzgZgOj9ym7B1H+U6XUZfsL4rxwBFPL+s7nMUIex+vb cU0dhs/3qmQrQ0ky6LdbdZcClGwwBlLIShGw4mWjw++GSG8ZSlueszUKKmbVTt7T lRPeO88GuN11oJMmut7Y =sRUk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
