Sgrìobh Rémy Maucherat na leanas 10/10/2024 aig 1:07f:
The crawler valve seems to be defined on the Engine, but more
importantly it seems you have no default host ?
So the request is not being mapped and it would return 404 (but the
valve would need some extra null checks).
Rémy
Ahhh of cour
gt; complaining that the Host used in the getClientIdentifier method within
> the CrawlerSessionManagerValve is null. Full stack trace is:
>
> 10-Oct-2024 10:47:35.297 SEVERE [http-nio-8080-exec-5]
> org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Processor.service Error processing request
> j
the CrawlerSessionManagerValve is null. Full stack trace is:
10-Oct-2024 10:47:35.297 SEVERE [http-nio-8080-exec-5]
org.apache.coyote.http11.Http11Processor.service Error processing request
java.lang.NullPointerException: Cannot invoke
"org.apache.catalina.Host.getName()" because "host
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Chris,
On 2/28/20 13:25, Chris Cheshire wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 12:51 PM Christopher Schultz
> wrote:
>>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>>
>> Chris and Mark,
>>
>> On 2/28/20 11:51, Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> On 28/02/2020
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 12:51 PM Christopher Schultz
wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Chris and Mark,
>
> On 2/28/20 11:51, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 28/02/2020 14:51, Chris Cheshire wrote:
> >> (9.0.31)
> >>
> >> What is the reason why the pattern isn't compiled wi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Chris and Mark,
On 2/28/20 11:51, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 28/02/2020 14:51, Chris Cheshire wrote:
>> (9.0.31)
>>
>> What is the reason why the pattern isn't compiled with the case
>> insensitive flag? Is it due to performance?
>
> I wrote that Valve
On 28/02/2020 14:51, Chris Cheshire wrote:
> (9.0.31)
>
> What is the reason why the pattern isn't compiled with the case
> insensitive flag? Is it due to performance?
I wrote that Valve. At least the first iteration anyway. Others improved
it along the way.
I honestly can't remember why I opted
(9.0.31)
What is the reason why the pattern isn't compiled with the case
insensitive flag? Is it due to performance?
Chris
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...
I can see what session is
being used. For the default host site, they reuse the same session. For the
non-default host sites, they create new sessions.
It is a limitation of the CrawlerSessionManagerValve. It only supports
one session per client IP as it maps client IP to session ID internally
Ahh, I can see that from the source now, thanks.
- Matt
-Original Message-
From: Mark Thomas
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 2:27 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: CrawlerSessionManagerValve only working with default host
On 12/04/18 00:10, Matt Cosentino wrote:
> I first noti
s being used. For the default host site, they reuse the same session. For
> the non-default host sites, they create new sessions.
It is a limitation of the CrawlerSessionManagerValve. It only supports
one session per client IP as it maps client IP to session ID internally.
Moving the Valve to
er_Valve
- Matt
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Schultz
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 1:46 PM
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Re: CrawlerSessionManagerValve only working with default host
Matt,
On 4/11/18 2:03 PM, Matt Cosentino wrote:
> I have CrawlerSessionManagerVal
Matt,
On 4/11/18 2:03 PM, Matt Cosentino wrote:
> I have CrawlerSessionManagerValve set up at the Engine level, but it only
> seems to be working for the default host and not any other host. Is this
> expected behavior? Should I put it at the host level for each host?
>
> Here i
I have CrawlerSessionManagerValve set up at the Engine level, but it only seems
to be working for the default host and not any other host. Is this expected
behavior? Should I put it at the host level for each host?
Here is an example of how I have it set up
2011/6/28 Mark Thomas
>
> On 27/06/2011 21:42, Martin Kouba wrote:
> > You may inspire yourself with code from my blog post -
> > http://www.symbiont-it.cz/crawlersessionmanagervalve-a-tomcat6, lines 86
> > to 134 (text is unfortunately in czech :-).
>
> No problem,
On 27/06/2011 21:42, Martin Kouba wrote:
> You may inspire yourself with code from my blog post -
> http://www.symbiont-it.cz/crawlersessionmanagervalve-a-tomcat6, lines 86
> to 134 (text is unfortunately in czech :-).
No problem, I can figure it out.
I actually went a differe
2011/6/27 Martin Kouba :
> Recently I've been using adapted code of CrawlerSessionManagerValve from
> Tomcat 7 on Tomcat 6 (JBossWeb 2.1.4 respectively). It works well. However I
> observed a lot of HTTP sessions that were created even if
> CrawlerSessionManagerValve logg
You may inspire yourself with code from my blog post -
http://www.symbiont-it.cz/crawlersessionmanagervalve-a-tomcat6, lines 86
to 134 (text is unfortunately in czech :-).
Cheers,
Martin
Dne 27.6.2011 15:29, Mark Thomas napsal(a):
On 27/06/2011 14:19, Martin Kouba wrote:
Recently I've
On 27/06/2011 14:19, Martin Kouba wrote:
> Recently I've been using adapted code of CrawlerSessionManagerValve from
> Tomcat 7 on Tomcat 6 (JBossWeb 2.1.4 respectively). It works well.
> However I observed a lot of HTTP sessions that were created even if
> CrawlerSessionMa
Recently I've been using adapted code of CrawlerSessionManagerValve from
Tomcat 7 on Tomcat 6 (JBossWeb 2.1.4 respectively). It works well.
However I observed a lot of HTTP sessions that were created even if
CrawlerSessionManagerValve logged sucessfull bot detection. Finally I
found
Recently I've been using adapted code of CrawlerSessionManagerValve from
Tomcat 7 on Tomcat 6 (JBossWeb 2.1.4 respectively). It works well.
However I observed a lot of HTTP sessions that were created even if
CrawlerSessionManagerValve logged sucessfull bot detection. Finally I
found
Mark Thomas wrote:
On 24/05/2011 12:50, Martin Kouba wrote:
What is the reason NOT to assume that request with more than one
User-Agent header originates from a bot?
See lines 133, 134 in Tomcat 7.0.14.
Simply that none of the samples I looked at had multiple UA headers and
a suggestion from a
On 24/05/2011 12:50, Martin Kouba wrote:
> What is the reason NOT to assume that request with more than one
> User-Agent header originates from a bot?
> See lines 133, 134 in Tomcat 7.0.14.
Simply that none of the samples I looked at had multiple UA headers and
a suggestion from another committer
What is the reason NOT to assume that request with more than one
User-Agent header originates from a bot?
See lines 133, 134 in Tomcat 7.0.14.
Thanks
Martin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For addi
24 matches
Mail list logo
