Hi List,
please somebody explain:
every few days, a strange procedure can be seen on this list.
Somebody asks for improvement, suggests a fix or simply wants to discuss a new
feature.
Few minutes later, there is an answer from somebody, which tells us to ignore
this subject, because it is not
o I am +0 on it, since don't have time to test it
> > FHDL>
> >
> > :-( Sorry to hear that, but at least you responded. Neutral is better
> > : than
> >
> > negative.
> >
> > FHDL>
> > FHDL> Filip
> > FHDL>
> >
> &
ny ideas ?
>
> I suppose native code could be used to improve the situation in some
> areas (although I don't know how to do it ;) ).
>
> Rémy
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additiona
Am Freitag, 7. April 2006 15:12 schrieb Remy Maucherat:
> Reinhard Moosauer wrote:
> > Now, with clustering, we could combine both. Consider the following:
> > 1. Set up a couple of tomcat servers (at least 2). I call them 'node'
> > These can sit on a single
pril 2006 22:01 schrieb Paul Speed:
> Reinhard Moosauer wrote:
> > Ok. But you can kill the webapp with the amok-thread. So we will not have
> > a break every 3 requests. (the thread can be tracked down to the failing
> > webapp. Send a mail with the thread-stack-dump)
>
> Y
rValues.length; i += 2) {
> getMethod.addRequestHeader(headerValues[i], headerValues
> [i +1]);
> }
> return httpClient.executeMethod(getMethod);
> }
>
> protected String responseBody() throws IOException {
> return getMeth
