Hi,
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > httpsession already has a settimeout no? so once a user logs in you > can set it to a longer period We use that technique (not on a wicket app though) and it seems to work. Something else to consider: Do you want Google (and other bots) to crawl your site ? If not, you could install a robots.txt file. http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=83097 regards, Maarten > > > -igor > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 7:38 AM, Jeremy Thomerson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks for the tip. I came up with an idea last night that I would like > to > > get input on. I created an HttpSessionListener that will track all > created > > sessions. It has a thread that will run every few minutes, and if a > session > > does not belong to a signed-in user, it will invalidate it after only > ten > > minutes of inactivity. If the session belongs to a signed-in user, it > will > > give them much longer to be inactive. > > > > Here's the code: http://pastebin.com/m712c7ff0 > > In the group's opinion, will this work? It seems like a hack to me, > but I > > have to do something. > > > > Jeremy > > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 1:56 AM, Erik van Oosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Jeremy, > > > > > > A workaround is to make the session timeout way lower and add some > keep > > > alive javascript to each page. For example as described by Eelco > > > ( > > > > http://chillenious.wordpress.com/2007/06/19/how-to-create-a-text-area-with-a-heart-beat-with-wicket/ > > > ). > > > > > > Regards, > > > Erik. > > > > > > > > > Jeremy Thomerson wrote: > > > > Yes - quite large. I'm hoping someone has an idea to overcome > this. > > > There > > > > were definitely not 4500+ unique users on the site at the time. > > > > > > > > There were two copies of the same app deployed on that server at > the > > > time - > > > > one was a staging environment, not being indexed, which is probably > > > where > > > > the extra ten wicket sessions came from. > > > > > > > > Any ideas? > > > > > > > > Jeremy > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/9/08, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > >> 4585 tomcat sessions? > > > >> > > > >> thats quite large if may say that.. > > > >> and even more 10 wicket sessions that tomcat sessions > > > >> Do you have multiply apps deployed on that server? > > > >> > > > >> if a search engine doesnt send a cookie back then the urls should > be > > > >> encoded with jsessionid > > > >> and we get the session from that.. > > > >> > > > >> johan > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > Erik van Oosten > > > http://day-to-day-stuff.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 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] > >
