Fwd: Re: [OT] Comodo as a CA

2008-04-27 Thread Nicholas Sushkin
Chris, AFAIK, current Comodo Elite SSL certificates are signed by a root certificate "UTN-UserFirst-Hardware Root CA". The UTN root cert seems to be supported by most browsers, but support by Sun JVM maybe more spotty. The most recent JDK 1.6 seems to support it, but double check your root stor

Re: [OT] Comodo as a CA

2008-04-27 Thread Terence M. Bandoian
Hi, Chris- I've used Comodo and don't remember any browser issues. -Terence M. Bandoian > Subject: > Re: [OT] Comodo as a CA > From: > Christopher Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: > Sat, 26 Apr 2008 09:40:23 -0400 > To: > Tomcat Users List > To: > Tomcat Users List > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL

RE: Can we slow down the speed of servlet response ?

2008-04-27 Thread Reich, Matthias
Hi, if your simulation really requires waiting on server side, you could also have a look at Comet (http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-6.0-doc/aio.html). A Comet solution would not block a thread per request while waiting for the timeout condition. By the way, when using the Http11NioProtocol on a L

Re: simple JSP redirect to another page -- how to deal with relative URLs

2008-04-27 Thread DIGLLOYD INC
Thanks for everyone's help on this and my related message. I found that using org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.UrlRewriteFilter works well: http://tuckey.org/urlrewrite/ With entries like: /diglloyd/free/CardReaders/CardReaders.html /diglloyd/free/CardReaders/ (I'

Re: simple JSP redirect to another page -- how to deal with relative URLs

2008-04-27 Thread DIGLLOYD INC
David, I want to redirect perhaps a dozen links in directories that have a main page accessed something like: /stuff/start-page.html In thinking about this, maybe my best solution is to rename the main page to "index.html" for simplicity and use the org.tuckey.web.filters.urlrewrite.UrlRewr

Re: CPong error

2008-04-27 Thread Rainer Jung
Hi Darin, darinpope schrieb: With this release, we were adding in some timeouts based on the recommendations from http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/generic_howto/timeouts.html http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/generic_howto/timeouts.html Previously, our workers.properties looked

RE: Tomcat6.0.16 is too easily to be OutOfMemory compared with Tomcat5.5

2008-04-27 Thread Caldarale, Charles R
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Tomcat6.0.16 is too easily to be OutOfMemory > compared with Tomcat5.5 > >appBase="" > errorReportValveClass="" While you're applying the changes Chris S suggests, consider fixing the above as well.

Re: Tomcat6.0.16 is too easily to be OutOfMemory compared with Tomcat5.5

2008-04-27 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kana, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I did a performance test with Apache Bench on Tomcat6.0.16. | During the test,I got many error in catalina.out. | SEVERE: Caught exception (java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space) | | # ./ab -c 200 -n 30

Re: CPong error

2008-04-27 Thread darinpope
With this release, we were adding in some timeouts based on the recommendations from http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/generic_howto/timeouts.html http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/generic_howto/timeouts.html Previously, our workers.properties looked like: worker.template-worker.typ

Tomcat6.0.16 is too easily to be OutOfM emory compare d with Tomcat5.5

2008-04-27 Thread kana-s
I did a performance test with Apache Bench on Tomcat6.0.16. During the test,I got many error in catalina.out. SEVERE: Caught exception (java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space) # ./ab -c 200 -n 30 http://**/sample/test.jsp Benchmarking 60.239.255.6 (be patient) Completed

Re: CPong error

2008-04-27 Thread Rainer Jung
darinpope schrieb: We've been doing some reconfiguration to try to track down some issues and with one of the changes, we are now getting a number of errors (but not all the time) like this one: [8624:1188] [info] jk_ajp_common.c (840): awaited reply cpong, received 3 instead [8624:1188] [info]

Re: CPong error

2008-04-27 Thread Mladen Turk
darinpope wrote: In all instances of the error, it always says "received 3 instead". Any idea what could be causing this issue? Probably the 10 second timeout or is too low. Regards -- (TM) - To start a new topic, e-mail: