On 10/03/2024 16:59, Manak Bisht wrote:
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 4:45 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
Using 0.0.0.0 as the address for the receiver is going to cause
problems. I see similar issues with 11.0.x as 8.5.x. I haven't dug too
deeply into things as a) I am short of time and b) I'm not convinced
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 4:45 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
> Using 0.0.0.0 as the address for the receiver is going to cause
> problems. I see similar issues with 11.0.x as 8.5.x. I haven't dug too
> deeply into things as a) I am short of time and b) I'm not convinced
> this should/could work anyway.
>
>
I would suggest focusing on Docker networking rather than Tomcat. My
guess is that how that works will inform your Tomcat configuration. You
might also try first getting it to work with two Docker instances on a
single machine.
-Terence Bandoian
On 3/1/2024 11:59 AM, Manak Bisht wrote:
I am
I am fairly certain now that the docker container is the problem. I am
unable to replicate the issue without it. Using the hostname/IP address of
the host (tomcat/ip) for the receiver always causes the following problem,
01-Mar-2024 22:30:32.315 INFO [main]
org.apache.catalina.tribes.transport.Rece
Manak,
On 2/12/24 10:33, Manak Bisht wrote:
Chris,
On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, 20:52 Christopher Schultz, <
ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote:
I wouldn't refuse to configure, since anyone using
0.0.0.0 with /separate/ hosts wouldn't experience this problem.
I am using separate hosts (two docker
Chris,
On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, 20:52 Christopher Schultz, <
ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote:
> I wouldn't refuse to configure, since anyone using
> 0.0.0.0 with /separate/ hosts wouldn't experience this problem.
I am using separate hosts (two docker containers on two different machines)
in my
Mark,
On 2/9/24 06:14, Mark Thomas wrote:
With the Receiver using address="0.0.0.0" I see the same issues you do.
I'm not yet convinced that is a bug.
If this is known to essentially always not-work... should we log
something at startup? I wouldn't refuse to configure, since anyone using
0.0
On 09/02/2024 07:51, Manak Bisht wrote:
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 3:25 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
Same JRE?
Yes, 8.0.402
Generally, I wouldn't use 0.0.0.0, I'd use a specific IP address. I'm
not sure how the clustering would behave with 0.0.0.0
Using 0.0.0.0 as the address for the receiver is
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 3:25 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
> Same JRE?
>
Yes, 8.0.402
Generally, I wouldn't use 0.0.0.0, I'd use a specific IP address. I'm
> not sure how the clustering would behave with 0.0.0.0
>
That's the problem really. Using the DNS name or IP address causes the
following error -
On 07/02/2024 11:43, Manak Bisht wrote:
I think I have narrowed down the problem. For Tomcat 9 (v9.0.85), using
0.0.0.0 for the local member and receiver works fine. However, the same
does not work in Tomcat 8.5 (v8.5.98).
Same JRE?
Generally, I wouldn't use 0.0.0.0, I'd use a specific IP addr
I think I have narrowed down the problem. For Tomcat 9 (v9.0.85), using
0.0.0.0 for the local member and receiver works fine. However, the same
does not work in Tomcat 8.5 (v8.5.98).
Sincerely,
Manak Bisht
On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 9:41 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 31/01/2024 13:33, Manak Bisht wro
On 31/01/2024 13:33, Manak Bisht wrote:
I tried tweaking all the settings that I could think of but I am unable to
sync sessions on restart even on a stock Tomcat 8.5.98 installation using
your provided war. I am unable to identify whether this is actually a bug
or something wrong with my configu
I tried tweaking all the settings that I could think of but I am unable to
sync sessions on restart even on a stock Tomcat 8.5.98 installation using
your provided war. I am unable to identify whether this is actually a bug
or something wrong with my configuration (this is far more likely). Could
yo
Hi Mark,
I tried running your *cluster-test* war example on a stock 8.5.98
installation, however, I am facing the same issue. Session sync does not
trigger on restarting a node. Could you please share your configuration?
Sincerely,
Manak Bisht
Thanks for going the extra mile to help me out on this. I really appreciate
it.
As far as I am aware, the auto detection of local member is only available
post v9.0.17 and the tag was added in v8.5.1. Unfortunately,
I happen to be working in an environment where 8.5.0 is the highest non-EOL
versio
I have configured my standard cluster test environment for a 2-node
cluster, using DeltaManager and static membership. httpd is configured
for non-sticky load-balancing.
Each node has the Manager web application and my simple cluster-test
deployed.
https://people.apache.org/~markt/dev/cluster
I thought that this https://marc.info/?l=tomcat-user&m=119376798217922&w=2
might be the problem.
*"The uniqueId is used to be able to differentiate between the same node
joining a cluster, then crashing and then rejoining again. if the uniqueId
didn't change in between this, there is no way to tel
Hi,
I am using DeltaManager (static membership) with non-sticky load balancing
on two nodes. I have observed even load, and requests with the same
JSESSIONID being served successfully by both tomcats. This leads me to
conclude that session replication is working as expected when both nodes
are up.
18 matches
Mail list logo
