I also faced the same problem and then decided to terminate SSL at
load balancer level and let Apache run only on http. I think mod_ssl
require some code change which may be someone take as project and work
on it.
Hope it helps.
Thanks
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Matthew Fletcher
wrote:
>
That LInk, as you put it, was merely the SIGNATURE LINE of my mailer. Geesh! I
figured if you were interested, you'd ask me to produce that example... I dnt
want to burden the users otherwise. Maybe I shouldn't care?I'll gladly send you
the example script if you are still interested.
---
On 4/27/2011 5:47 PM, Stephen Love wrote:
> OK, I just thought had had some legitimate concerns.
I do have one legitimate concern, your past several posts appear to offer
no actual "solutions", only the promise that things are possible, and a
link to your website, which does not serve the users@ht
OK, I just thought had had some legitimate concerns.
See us online at http://www.LOVEnCompany.com.
-- Original Message --
From: "William A. Rowe Jr."
To: users@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [users@httpd] One Apache ( having two hostname but one IP ) for tw
o websites
Date: Tue,
> > I am having trouble trying to get apache to use a sqlite3 database
> for authentication using dbd. I get the following in my error log:
> >
> > [Wed Apr 27 13:48:07 2011] [error] (20014)Internal error: DBD: failed
> to prepare SQL statements: not an error
> > [Wed Apr 27 13:48:07 2011] [error]
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:04:47 -0700
Larry Low wrote:
> I am having trouble trying to get apache to use a sqlite3 database for
> authentication using dbd. I get the following in my error log:
>
> [Wed Apr 27 13:48:07 2011] [error] (20014)Internal error: DBD: failed to
> prepare SQL statements:
I'm not sure if this or the APR list was appropriate but the APR list seemed to
only have a dev mailing list.
I am having trouble trying to get apache to use a sqlite3 database for
authentication using dbd. I get the following in my error log:
[Wed Apr 27 13:48:07 2011] [error] (20014)Internal
Jeffrey E Burgoyne wrote:
>
> Actually I think the behavior is the same, but the entry in
> the logs is different. I know in 1.3 it was chronological,
> which leads me to believe it was actually the finish time not
> the end time.
Where is the difference between the finish time and the end time
Actually I think the behavior is the same, but the entry in the logs is
different. I know in 1.3 it was chronological, which leads me to believe
it was actually the finish time not the end time. To be honest that was a
few years ago, I remember the change but not the details.
And yes you are corre
Jeffrey E Burgoyne wrote:
>
> The time listed is the time the request was received and the
> order is based on the time it finished is the most likely
> culprit. Requests taking longer will cause this.
>
> You can verify by adding %T parameter to your logging as that
> gives you the time it took
Sorry simply when i am increasing concurrent(400 to 600 to 800 to
1000) requests response time also increasing.i want same response time what
i am getting with 400 only.
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Harsimranjit singh Kler
> wrote:
> >
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Lentes, Bernd
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> we have an Apache 1.3.27. Some entries in the access_log are not
> chronological, e.g.:
They're logged when they're complete, but the timestamp in the logfile
is when the request was recevied. When they're out of order, it just
me
Hi,
we have an Apache 1.3.27. Some entries in the access_log are not chronological,
e.g.:
146.107.x.x - - [23/Apr/2011:22:01:03 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 1456
146.107.x.x - - [23/Apr/2011:22:01:03 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 1456
146.107.x.x - - [23/Apr/2011:22:01:03 +0200] "GET / HTTP/1.0" 20
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Harsimranjit singh Kler
wrote:
> Hi Jeff
>
> Whenever i am increasing number of worker(tomcat) my response time
> increased.If i am running 1 tomcat & 1 LB with above configuration and
> hitting 400 concurrent requests it give me expected response time.when i
> add
Hi Jeff
Whenever i am increasing number of worker(tomcat) my response time
increased.If i am running 1 tomcat & 1 LB with above configuration and
hitting 400 concurrent requests it give me expected response time.when i
added one more tomcat (so total 2 worker,1 LB) and hitting concurrent 800
reque
15 matches
Mail list logo
