RE: mod_jk ping_timeout revisit

2009-04-17 Thread Anthony J. Biacco
> >>> So I set tomcat's connectionTimeout to 0 and repeat request. > >>> This time Tomcat (after 60 seconds) doesn't reset the keeped alive socket count to 0 (as expected), socket still > > >>> in stage 'R'. > >>> > >>> ... > >>> > >> We saw that. Since Cping/Cpong worked, we do not even have an in

Re: mod_jk ping_timeout revisit

2009-04-17 Thread Rainer Jung
On 17.04.2009 01:30, Anthony J. Biacco wrote: >> On 16.04.2009 01:49, Anthony J. Biacco wrote: >>> worker.template.socket_timeout=10 >> I'm not very much in favor of the socket_timeout, but well, if you >> think >> you need it. Just for the sake of completeness, please check, whether >> having no s

RE: mod_jk ping_timeout revisit

2009-04-16 Thread Anthony J. Biacco
Rainer thanx for the input, comments below. > > On 16.04.2009 01:49, Anthony J. Biacco wrote: > > A month or so ago I posted that I was having problems with mod_jk > > (1.2.27) getting a pong response back from tomcat (6.0.18) in > responses > > to a ping. Apache is 2.2.11 with worker mpm. > > >

Re: mod_jk ping_timeout revisit

2009-04-16 Thread Rainer Jung
Hi Anthony, On 16.04.2009 01:49, Anthony J. Biacco wrote: > A month or so ago I posted that I was having problems with mod_jk > (1.2.27) getting a pong response back from tomcat (6.0.18) in responses > to a ping. Apache is 2.2.11 with worker mpm. > > I have a little more information now and am ho