Re: [Tomcat Wiki] Update of "TomcatVersions" by markt

[jean-frederic clere]

> @@ -55, +77 @@
> 
>   ||Spec versions:||Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1||
>   ||Stable:||Yes||
>   ||Enhancements:||TBD - currently Yes||
> - ||Bug Fixes:||Yes||
> + ||Bug Fixes:||TBD - currently Yes||
> - ||Security Fixes:||Yes||
> + ||Security Fixes:||TBD - currently Yes||
> + ||Process:||RTC||
>   ||Listed on download pages||Yes||
>   ||Release Manager:||Remy Maucherat (remm)||
>   
> + = Tomcat 6.2.x =
> + ||Spec versions:||Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1||
> + ||Stable:||Yes||
> + ||Enhancements:||Yes||
> + ||Bug Fixes:||Yes||
> + ||Security Fixes:||Yes||
> + ||Process:||RTC||
> + ||Listed on download pages||Yes||
> + ||Release Manager:||TBD||
> + Features:
> +  * 6.0.x plus
> +  * Geronimo API changes
> +  * TBD
> + 
> + = Tomcat 6.3.x =
> + ||Spec versions:||Servlet 2.5, JSP 2.1||
> + ||Stable:||No||
> + ||Enhancements:||Yes||
> + ||Bug Fixes:||Yes||
> + ||Security Fixes:||Yes||
> + ||Process:||CTR||
> + ||Listed on download pages||Yes||
> + ||Release Manager:||TBD||
> + Features:
> +  * 6.2.x plus
> +  * TBD
> + 

Having a 6.2.x and a 6.3.x doesn't fit with the httpd way.
I think that we should have a trunk based on the actual 6.0.x and
discuss what we want to include in it.

Cheers

Jean-Frederic

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: svn commit: r578613 - in /tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk: java/org/apache/catalina/core/StandardContext.java webapps/docs/changelog.xml

[Remy Maucherat]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Author: funkman
Date: Sun Sep 23 16:53:05 2007
New Revision: 578613

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=578613&view=rev
Log:
bug 43453: ClassCastException at  
org.apache.catalina.core.StandardContext.findStatusPage(int)

In reality - I don't see anywhere that calls findStatusPage(). Is there a 
chance (in the future)
to drop this method from StandardContext as well as the Context interface? 


I can confirm this is not called anywhere, and it would be a good idea 
to remove this method.


Rémy

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43457] New: - Native:JK Component - Error thrown by worker ajp13

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43457

   Summary: Native:JK Component - Error thrown by worker ajp13
   Product: Tomcat 6
   Version: unspecified
  Platform: Sun
OS/Version: Solaris
Status: NEW
  Severity: critical
  Priority: P2
 Component: Native:JK
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Hi

I have compiled tomcat-connectors-1.2.25-src.tar.gz on Sun One Webserver 6.1 
SP2. I am using it to establish communication between Sun One Webserver 6.1 
SP2 and Vignette Collaboration server 7.1 which runs a tomcat internally. The 
architecture is that the request from the browser goes to the webserver which 
then communicates with the Colloboration server.

I am frequently getting a 'Page not found' error whenever I route the request 
via the webserver. On running the Collaboration server without the webserver, 
I don't see this error. 

Follwoing is the error in the nsapi.log file:

[Mon Sep 24 11:40:28.404 2007] [3025:61] [warn] 
ajp_get_endpoint::jk_ajp_common.c (2505): Unable to get the free endpoint for 
worker ajp13 from 1 slots
[Mon Sep 24 11:40:28.404 2007] [3025:61] [info] 
ajp_get_endpoint::jk_ajp_common.c (2519): can't find free endpoint

Can this be fixed?

Thanks
Varnita

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43457] - Native:JK Component - Error thrown by worker ajp13

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43457


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||INVALID




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-09-24 05:21 ---
I guess, your workers.properties does not contain a connection pool size bigger
than 1. From the page

http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/webserver_howto/nes.html:

"Edit your worker definition file workers.properties. You should at least choose
a connection pool size:"

For the meaning of the parameter, search for "connection_pool_size" on page
http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/reference/workers.html.

If my guess is wrong, please give your configuration details and reopen this 
ticket.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41797] - CNFE/NPE thrown from function mapper when externalizing

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41797


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-09-24 06:09 ---
I verified the issue but could not test against a build since there doesn't seem
to be CI oriented mavenization (neither for snapshots nor real versions?). Hence
I don't feel comfortable marking this closed myself without actually testing it
first with a build common for all.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43461] New: - mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43461

   Summary: mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation
   Product: Tomcat 5
   Version: Unknown
  Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
  Severity: enhancement
  Priority: P2
 Component: Native:JK
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Additional information regarding the JkShmFile directive has been added.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43461] - mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43461





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-09-24 08:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=20871)
 --> (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20871&action=view)
JkShmFile directive update

Original file location:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/connectors/trunk/jk/xdocs/reference/apache.xml

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43462] New: - mod_jk JkShmSize directive automatic configuration

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43462

   Summary: mod_jk JkShmSize directive automatic configuration
   Product: Tomcat 5
   Version: Unknown
  Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
  Severity: enhancement
  Priority: P2
 Component: Connector:AJP
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Ability of the the mod_jk JkShmSize directive to automatically optimize it's
size according to the amount of lb workers.

Comments from Rainer Jung:

Yes, that would be nice. Unfortunately this requires a little code surgery and
not only a small patch, because at the moment the shm is statically acquired
(fixed size) and we need it before we parse the worker configuration, so beforee
we know, how many workers we have. To fix that, we would either need to count
the workers in a separate pass in advance, or enhance the shm handling to allow
growth of it.

At the moment we initialize the shm for 64 workers, which on some platforms lead
to 28800 Bytes size. Actually I'm not sure, if we will really be able to use 64
workers, or if the number is slightly smaller (63?), because we might need to
subtract some offset size used as a header.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43463] New: - Change default location of JkShmFile

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43463

   Summary: Change default location of JkShmFile
   Product: Tomcat 5
   Version: Unknown
  Platform: Other
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: Connector:AJP
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


The current default location is:
logs/jk-runtime-status

a more appropriate location if the Linux File System Hierarchy is followed,
would be:
/var/run/jk-runtime-status

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43463] - Change default location of JkShmFile

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43463


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||INVALID




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-09-24 09:15 ---
I don't agree with this one.
JK is multi-platform. In terms of Apache httpd the correct directory would be
runtimedir (or DEFAULT_REL_RUNTIMEDIR) both of which are configured during httpd
build time, but unfortunately they are not available after httpd installation.
So the apxs build system doesn't give a hook to get the correct run directory
from httpd.

So we are up to decide upon good defaults. Since the logs directory exists for
all ASF provided httpd downloads, it seems this is a good directory for a 
default.

If the user doesn't use the JkShmFile, he gets a log message about JK using the
default. So if he looks at his logs, he will be aware, that the logs directory
gets used.

In case you've got a better solution, please reopen this issue.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43462] - mod_jk JkShmSize directive automatic configuration

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43462


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||LATER




-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43461] - mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43461


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Attachment #20871|0   |1
is obsolete||




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-09-24 09:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=20873)
 --> (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20873&action=view)
Modified patch

Patch from the modified page provided earlier. Slioghtly reordered and
shortened.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43461] - mod_jk JkShmFile directive documentation

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43461


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-09-24 09:34 ---
Hi Gerhardus,

Full page is better than a page with varying line endings, but a real patch
would even be nicer :)

I did some small reorderings and shortened it a bit.

Thanks.

Rainer

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

6.0.x request processing patch

[Filip Hanik - Dev Lists]

Currently, the RequestInfo.getRequestProcessingTime is not taking into 
account if the request is active or not, hence returning a larger and 
larger value if a new request is not received.

The patch addresses the following

1. getRequestProcessingTime returns 0 if no request is active
2. getLastRequestProcessingTime will return the time for the last request

Does anyone think the values that are returned should be different?
thoughts?
Filip
Index: org/apache/coyote/RequestInfo.java
===
--- org/apache/coyote/RequestInfo.java  (revision 578847)
+++ org/apache/coyote/RequestInfo.java  (working copy)
@@ -112,7 +112,8 @@
 }
 
 public long getRequestProcessingTime() {
-return (System.currentTimeMillis() - req.getStartTime());
+if ( req.getStartTime() == 0 ) return 0;
+else return (System.currentTimeMillis() - req.getStartTime());
 }
 
 //  Statistical data  
@@ -130,6 +131,9 @@
 private int requestCount;
 // number of response codes >= 400
 private int errorCount;
+
+//the time of the last request
+private long lastRequestProcssingTime = 0;
 
 
 /** Called by the processor before recycling the request. It'll collect
@@ -145,11 +149,13 @@
 long t0=req.getStartTime();
 long t1=System.currentTimeMillis();
 long time=t1-t0;
+this.lastRequestProcssingTime = time;
 processingTime+=time;
 if( maxTime < time ) {
 maxTime=time;
 maxRequestUri=req.requestURI().toString();
 }
+req.setStartTime(0);
 }
 
 public int getStage() {
@@ -224,6 +230,10 @@
 return rpName;
 }
 
+public long getLastRequestProcssingTime() {
+return lastRequestProcssingTime;
+}
+
 public void setWorkerThreadName(String workerThreadName) {
 this.workerThreadName = workerThreadName;
 }
@@ -231,4 +241,8 @@
 public void setRpName(ObjectName rpName) {
 this.rpName = rpName;
 }
+
+public void setLastRequestProcssingTime(long lastRequestProcssingTime) {
+this.lastRequestProcssingTime = lastRequestProcssingTime;
+}
 }
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: 6.0.x request processing patch

[Bill Barker]

I would think that using the stage would be more reliable than hacking the
startTime, but otherwise, I have no strong opinion either way. 

> -Original Message-
> From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 11:49 AM
> To: Tomcat Developers List
> Subject: 6.0.x request processing patch
> 
> Currently, the RequestInfo.getRequestProcessingTime is not 
> taking into 
> account if the request is active or not, hence returning a larger and 
> larger value if a new request is not received.
> The patch addresses the following
> 
> 1. getRequestProcessingTime returns 0 if no request is active
> 2. getLastRequestProcessingTime will return the time for the 
> last request
> 
> Does anyone think the values that are returned should be different?
> thoughts?
> Filip
> 



This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the 
intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and 
CONFIDENTIAL.  If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or 
distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of 
this message and any attachments.

In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through 
the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, 
such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification 
numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: 6.0.x request processing patch

[Filip Hanik - Dev Lists]

Bill Barker wrote:

I would think that using the stage would be more reliable than hacking the
startTime, but otherwise, I have no strong opinion either way. 
  

yes, that makes sense.
Filip
  

-Original Message-
From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 11:49 AM

To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: 6.0.x request processing patch

Currently, the RequestInfo.getRequestProcessingTime is not 
taking into 
account if the request is active or not, hence returning a larger and 
larger value if a new request is not received.

The patch addresses the following

1. getRequestProcessingTime returns 0 if no request is active
2. getLastRequestProcessingTime will return the time for the 
last request


Does anyone think the values that are returned should be different?
thoughts?
Filip






This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the 
intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and 
CONFIDENTIAL.  If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or 
distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of 
this message and any attachments.

In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through 
the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, 
such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification 
numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail.


-
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]

Re: 6.0.x request processing patch

[Filip Hanik - Dev Lists]

here is the modified patch

Filip

Bill Barker wrote:

I would think that using the stage would be more reliable than hacking the
startTime, but otherwise, I have no strong opinion either way. 

  

-Original Message-
From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 11:49 AM

To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: 6.0.x request processing patch

Currently, the RequestInfo.getRequestProcessingTime is not 
taking into 
account if the request is active or not, hence returning a larger and 
larger value if a new request is not received.

The patch addresses the following

1. getRequestProcessingTime returns 0 if no request is active
2. getLastRequestProcessingTime will return the time for the 
last request


Does anyone think the values that are returned should be different?
thoughts?
Filip






This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) listed above as the 
intended recipient(s), and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and 
CONFIDENTIAL.  If you are not an intended recipient, you may not read, copy, or 
distribute this message or any attachment. If you received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and then delete all copies of 
this message and any attachments.

In addition you should be aware that ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail sent through 
the Internet is not secure. Do not send confidential or sensitive information, 
such as social security numbers, account numbers, personal identification 
numbers and passwords, to us via ordinary (unencrypted) e-mail.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



  


Index: java/org/apache/coyote/RequestInfo.java
===
--- java/org/apache/coyote/RequestInfo.java (revision 578847)
+++ java/org/apache/coyote/RequestInfo.java (working copy)
@@ -112,7 +112,8 @@
 }
 
 public long getRequestProcessingTime() {
-return (System.currentTimeMillis() - req.getStartTime());
+if ( getStage() == org.apache.coyote.Constants.STAGE_ENDED ) return 0;
+else return (System.currentTimeMillis() - req.getStartTime());
 }
 
 //  Statistical data  
@@ -130,6 +131,9 @@
 private int requestCount;
 // number of response codes >= 400
 private int errorCount;
+
+//the time of the last request
+private long lastRequestProcssingTime = 0;
 
 
 /** Called by the processor before recycling the request. It'll collect
@@ -145,6 +149,7 @@
 long t0=req.getStartTime();
 long t1=System.currentTimeMillis();
 long time=t1-t0;
+this.lastRequestProcssingTime = time;
 processingTime+=time;
 if( maxTime < time ) {
 maxTime=time;
@@ -224,6 +229,10 @@
 return rpName;
 }
 
+public long getLastRequestProcssingTime() {
+return lastRequestProcssingTime;
+}
+
 public void setWorkerThreadName(String workerThreadName) {
 this.workerThreadName = workerThreadName;
 }
@@ -231,4 +240,8 @@
 public void setRpName(ObjectName rpName) {
 this.rpName = rpName;
 }
+
+public void setLastRequestProcssingTime(long lastRequestProcssingTime) {
+this.lastRequestProcssingTime = lastRequestProcssingTime;
+}
 }
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

svn commit: r578963 - in /tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net: NioBlockingSelector.java NioEndpoint.java

[fhanik]

Author: fhanik
Date: Mon Sep 24 13:56:31 2007
New Revision: 578963

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=578963&view=rev
Log:
optimize pollers, don't lock into a blocking select if there are other things 
for the thread to do

Modified:

tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioBlockingSelector.java
tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioEndpoint.java

Modified: 
tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioBlockingSelector.java
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioBlockingSelector.java?rev=578963&r1=578962&r2=578963&view=diff
==
--- 
tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioBlockingSelector.java 
(original)
+++ 
tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioBlockingSelector.java 
Mon Sep 24 13:56:31 2007
@@ -207,8 +207,7 @@
 }
 
 public void wakeup() {
-int i = wakeupCounter.addAndGet(1);
-if (i==1) selector.wakeup();
+if (wakeupCounter.addAndGet(1)==0) selector.wakeup();
 }
 
 public void cancel(SelectionKey sk, KeyAttachment key, int ops){
@@ -301,8 +300,10 @@
 int i = wakeupCounter.get();
 if (i>0) 
 keyCount = selector.selectNow();
-else
+else {
+wakeupCounter.set(-1);
 keyCount = selector.select(1000);
+}
 wakeupCounter.set(0);
 if (!run) break;
 }catch ( NullPointerException x ) {

Modified: tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioEndpoint.java
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioEndpoint.java?rev=578963&r1=578962&r2=578963&view=diff
==
--- tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioEndpoint.java 
(original)
+++ tomcat/sandbox/gdev6x/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/NioEndpoint.java Mon 
Sep 24 13:56:31 2007
@@ -1342,7 +1342,7 @@
 
 public void addEvent(Runnable event) {
 events.offer(event);
-if ( wakeupCounter.incrementAndGet() < 3 ) selector.wakeup();
+if ( wakeupCounter.incrementAndGet() == 0 ) selector.wakeup();
 }
 
 public void cometInterest(NioChannel socket) {
@@ -1459,7 +1459,14 @@
 int keyCount = 0;
 try {
 if ( !close ) {
-keyCount = selector.select(selectorTimeout);
+if (wakeupCounter.get()>0) {
+//if we are here, means we have other stuff to 
do
+//do a non blocking select
+keyCount = selector.selectNow();
+}else {
+wakeupCounter.set( -1);
+keyCount = selector.select(selectorTimeout);
+}
 wakeupCounter.set(0);
 }
 if (close) {



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

svn commit: r578980 - /tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS

[remm]

Author: remm
Date: Mon Sep 24 14:27:16 2007
New Revision: 578980

URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=578980&view=rev
Log:
- Add status file.

Added:
tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS

Added: tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS
URL: 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS?rev=578980&view=auto
==
--- tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS (added)
+++ tomcat/tc6.0.x/trunk/STATUS Mon Sep 24 14:27:16 2007
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+
+  Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
+  contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file distributed with
+  this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
+  The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
+  (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
+  the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+
+  http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+
+  Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+  distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+  WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+  See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+  limitations under the License.
+
+
+$Id: BUILDING.txt 562769 2007-08-04 22:08:32Z markt $
+
+ =
+ Apache Tomcat 6.0 Patch Proposals
+ =
+
+
+PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT:
+  [ New proposals should be added at the end of the list ]
+
+* New cookie parser (third party contribution)
+  +1: 
+  -1: 
+



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43468] New: - HTMLManagerServlet NullPointerException listing context

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43468

   Summary: HTMLManagerServlet NullPointerException listing context
   Product: Tomcat 6
   Version: 6.0.14
  Platform: Sun
   URL: http://localhost:8080/manager/html/list
OS/Version: Solaris
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: Manager application
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Obtained the following NullPointerException, stack trace below

java.lang.NullPointerException

org.apache.catalina.manager.HTMLManagerServlet.list(HTMLManagerServlet.java:437)

org.apache.catalina.manager.HTMLManagerServlet.doGet(HTMLManagerServlet.java:136)

Code is:

args[11] = new Integer(context.getManager().getMaxInactiveInterval()/60);

Seemingly the getManager() is returning null.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Tomcat 6 and Java 5 syntax

[Lucas Galfaso]

Hi,
  I am looking at the Tomcat 6 code and checking out the the
possibility of collaborating with the project, and one thing that pops
up is that the entire code base is not using Java 5 syntax. Was this
syntax avoided for a specific reason?

Regards,
  lg

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43470] New: - ClassCastException at org.apache.catalina.deploy.NamingResources

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43470

   Summary: ClassCastException at
org.apache.catalina.deploy.NamingResources
   Product: Tomcat 6
   Version: 6.0.14
  Platform: Other
OS/Version: other
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: Catalina
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


NamingResources reads

public void removeLocalEjb(String name) {

entries.remove(name);

ContextLocalEjb localEjb = null;
synchronized (localEjbs) {
localEjb = (ContextLocalEjb) ejbs.remove(name);
}
if (localEjb != null) {
support.firePropertyChange("localEjb", localEjb, null);
localEjb.setNamingResources(null);
}

}

if should be 

public void removeLocalEjb(String name) {

entries.remove(name);

ContextLocalEjb localEjb = null;
synchronized (localEjbs) {
localEjb = (ContextLocalEjb) localEjbs.remove(name); // The error
was in this line
}
if (localEjb != null) {
support.firePropertyChange("localEjb", localEjb, null);
localEjb.setNamingResources(null);
}

}

Regards,
  lg

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Tomcat 6 and Java 5 syntax

[Mark Thomas]

Lucas Galfaso wrote:
> Hi,
>   I am looking at the Tomcat 6 code and checking out the the
> possibility of collaborating with the project, and one thing that pops
> up is that the entire code base is not using Java 5 syntax. Was this
> syntax avoided for a specific reason?

The code is based on (actually copied from) Tomcat 5. TC5 required JDK
1.4. Java 5 syntax is added as we develop new features or fix bugs.

Mark


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43470] - ClassCastException at org.apache.catalina.deploy.NamingResources

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43470





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-09-24 20:02 ---
There are some more bug at this same class
It reads

public void addResourceEnvRef(ContextResourceEnvRef resource) {

if (entries.containsKey(resource.getName())) {
return;
} else {
entries.put(resource.getName(), resource.getType());
}

synchronized (localEjbs) { // This is wrong
resource.setNamingResources(this);
resourceEnvRefs.put(resource.getName(), resource);
}
support.firePropertyChange("resourceEnvRef", null, resource);

}

Corrected version

public void addResourceEnvRef(ContextResourceEnvRef resource) {

if (entries.containsKey(resource.getName())) {
return;
} else {
entries.put(resource.getName(), resource.getType());
}

synchronized (resource) { // This is correct
resource.setNamingResources(this);
resourceEnvRefs.put(resource.getName(), resource);
}
support.firePropertyChange("resourceEnvRef", null, resource);

}



and

public void removeResourceEnvRef(String name) {

entries.remove(name);

String type = null;
synchronized (resourceEnvRefs) {
type = (String) resourceEnvRefs.remove(name);
}
if (type != null) {
support.firePropertyChange("resourceEnvRef",
   name + ":" + type, null);
}

}


Should be

public void removeResourceEnvRef(String name) {

entries.remove(name);

ContextResourceEnvRef resourceEventRef = null;
synchronized (resourceEnvRefs) {
resourceEventRef = (ContextResourceEnvRef) 
resourceEnvRefs.remove(name);
}
if (resourceEventRef != null) {
support.firePropertyChange("resourceEnvRef",
   name + ":" + resourceEventRef.getType(),
null);
}

}


Regards,
  lg

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 43470] - ClassCastException at org.apache.catalina.deploy.NamingResources

[bugzilla]

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43470





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-09-24 20:47 ---
Thanks for all your patches. Could you provide them in diff -u format as they
are easier to read and apply that way. Cheers.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: 6.0.x request processing patch

[Rainer Jung]

Hi Filip,

I guess that also fixes the misleading html manager display (request 
times going up and up). That would be very nice.


Just a quick shot:

- maybe you can fix Procssing -> Processing everywhere

- will this change the behaviour of the requestProcessingTime as one can 
retrieve from the MBeans of the GlobalRequestProcessor or Servlets? I 
guess (and hope) no?


- lastRequestProcssingTime: This item is new but apart from the new 
setter and getter not used, especially not in the 
getRequestProcessingTime fix. If this data is needed, shouldn't we also 
expose it via the mbean descriptor? It's nice for a statistic sampling 
of response times.


Regards,

Rainer

Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:

here is the modified patch

Filip

Bill Barker wrote:
I would think that using the stage would be more reliable than hacking 
the

startTime, but otherwise, I have no strong opinion either way.
 

-Original Message-
From: Filip Hanik - Dev Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 
Monday, September 24, 2007 11:49 AM

To: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: 6.0.x request processing patch

Currently, the RequestInfo.getRequestProcessingTime is not taking 
into account if the request is active or not, hence returning a 
larger and larger value if a new request is not received.

The patch addresses the following

1. getRequestProcessingTime returns 0 if no request is active
2. getLastRequestProcessingTime will return the time for the last 
request


Does anyone think the values that are returned should be different?
thoughts?
Filip


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]