,
My apologies. I dropped the ball on this one. I've just re-read the thread to
remind myself of the details. I'm aiming to get this fixed for the November
release round.
Mark
On 10/10/2024 10:10, Eric Robinson wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> Just following up on this. Did you
-Original Message-----
From: Eric Robinson
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 11:11 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
(Some, Not All)
Hi Mark,
Just following up on this. Did you arrive at the long-term solution? This issue
Hi Mark,
Just following up on this. Did you arrive at the long-term solution? This issue
is still biting us.
-Original Message-
From: Eric Robinson
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 4:15 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
ll)
On 11/10/2024 01:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> Mark,
>
> Thanks very much for the update. We'll check back in November!
I've just committed the fix. It should be in the next set of releases
(November).
Mark
>
> -Eric
>
>
> -Original Message-
>
One of our hosting customers is a medical practice using a commercial EMR
running on tomcat+mysql. It has operated well for over a year, but users have
suddenly begun experiencing slowness for about an hour at the same time every
day. During the slow times, we've done all the usual troubleshooti
t; > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Eric Robinson
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. Mai 2024 03:59
> > An: users@tomcat.apache.org
> > Betreff: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the
> > Wire (Some, Not All)
> >
> > One of our
t; > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Chuck Caldarale
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. Mai 2024 21:21
> > An: Tomcat Users List
> > Betreff: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on
> > the Wire (Some, Not All)
> >
> >
> >
Hi Chuck,
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2024 2:21 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
>
> > On May 25, 2024, at 20:58, Eric R
questions in-line. I have also read the other
> messages in
> this thread and added a couple of additional questions based on what I read in
> those threads.
>
>
> On 26/05/2024 02:58, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > One of our hosting customers is a medical practice using a commerci
Hi Mark,
See comments below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 9:32 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> Follow-up observsations and comments in-
> > On 28/05/2024 16:26, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> Took a bunch of thread and heap dumps during today's painful debacle.
> >> Will send a link to those as soon as I can.
> >
> > Thanks. I have them. I have taken a look and
Mark,
A few other thoughts come to mind. See below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 7:39 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, No
Hi Mark,
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 10:10 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> On 29/05/2024 13:38, Eric Robinson w
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 10:19 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> On 29/05/2024 16:08, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
&g
slava
> next week.
>
> I am expecting that any fix won't be in the June release round but should be
> in
> the July release round.
>
> Let us know how you get on and good luck.
>
Will do!
> Mark
>
>
> On 30/05/2024 10:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 29
d.
>
> Let us know how you get on and good luck.
>
The changes have been applied. We'll know at around 9:30 am EST if they have
had the desired effect. Fingers crossed!
> Mark
>
>
> On 30/05/2024 10:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 29/05/2024 17:03, Eric Robinson wrot
today,
there have been 1 stuck thread on Tomcat A and 6 on Tomcat B.
If the numbers hold, this works out to roughly a 10,000% improvement.
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 5:54 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Database
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 11:45 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> On 31/05/2024 16:09, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Th
wrote:
> > On 31/05/2024 16:09, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> The results are looking great so far.
> >
> > Excellent.
> >
> >> Here's what we know:
> >>
> >> Before the patch, we had 2 load-balanced tomcats in production for
> >>
Chris,
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 12:50 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> Eric,
>
> On 5/31
We have a tomcat server that is not that busy. It has 100 tomcat instances
running, but it handles a few hundred connections per second total, across all
of them. It intermittently rejects connection attempts to listening tomcats.
The server is running Rocky 8, has 48 cores (about 15-40% utilize
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:29 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2024, at 15:19, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:40 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2024, at 15:36, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
>
ist
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2024, at 15:47, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Chuck Caldarale
> >> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:40 PM
> >> T
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 2:51 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2024, at 16:40, Eric Robinson
> wrote:
> >
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 11:01 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 25, 2024, at 12:55, Eric Robinson
> wrote:
> >
> &
>
> No - Tomcat passes the acceptCount value to the TCP/IP stack of the OS as
> part of listener socket initialization.
I thought of that after I sent my previous message.
> the OS won't log this, since it's considered to be an application error.
Assuming the problem is the acceptCount value, th
> What is impact on memory utilization if we increase the acceptCount value?
> There are 100 tomcat instances on the server. And would maxThreads have to
> be increased to accommodate the extra connections?
After reading more, I guess that's a dumb question.
I'm trying to prevent connections from
We want to run a large number of tomcat instances on the same server without
virtualization or containerization. Each instance is executed from its own
folder tree and listens on its own unique TCP port. Each instance will run code
that connects to a backend database server to send queries that
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Eggers
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 6:18 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Do I Need Network NameSpaces to Solve This
> Tomcat+Connector/J Problem?
>
> Eric:
>
> On 12/29/2021 1:04 PM, Eric Robinson wro
> Your problem seems to be in the client-to-db server side of things. Not
> tomcat as a server.
>
In the context of this question, tomcat is the client.
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 2:11 PM Eric Robinson
> wrote:
>
> > We want to run a large number of tomcat inst
Hi Simon,
> I guess the database is not on the Tomcat host, otherwise you could connect
> via unix domain socket to avoid the limitations of TCP port numbers.
>
> Otherwise I think you could run a db proxy where your Tomcat clients
> connect locally via unix domain socket and the proxy relays the
Mark,
> > My question is, is there a better way?
>
> I can only think of variations on a theme.
>
> The ~64k limit assumes client IP, server IP and server port remain constant.
> i.e. just client port is varying.
>
> That suggests there is a single IP for the database server and that it is
> liste
José,
> Is this setup going to be open to the world or just a big organization? A big
> organization would put a cap on the number of users. Then maybe they
> could divide those between the tomcat instances thus the db server.
>
It's a SaaS solution, where each customer organization gets its own
Stefan,
> A third option could be to add something between database client and
> server. Something on layer 4 like multiple HAProxy servers or simple NAT
> gateways. Or more complex on layer 7 specfic products like ProxySQL or
> MaxScale. They could even pool connections and reduce the load on the
Chris,
> Stupid question: can your database (meaningfully) handle the number of
> connections you are making to it? Let's say you have 5000 connections per
> Tomcat instance to your database, and you want 500 Tomcat instances.
> That means 250 database connections. If every single one of those
Chris,
> Not pooling connections will very likely negatively affect performance.
>
> When you say "they ... have an issue with connection pooling" do you mean
> that they have a technical problem, or do you mean that there is some ill-
> conceived policy against them?
>
> Oh, maybe they are parano
José,
> -Original Message-
> From: José Cornado
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2021 12:00 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Do I Need Network NameSpaces to Solve This
> Tomcat+Connector/J Problem?
>
> But they do not get a corresponding database instance?
>
They do. Each tomcat
> José,
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: José Cornado
> > Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2021 12:00 PM
> > To: Tomcat Users List
> > Subject: Re: Do I Need Network NameSpaces to Solve This
> > Tomcat+Connector/J Problem?
> >
> > But they do not get a corresponding database instance?
> >
>
Chris,
If I want to ignore the vendor's recommendation and try connection pooling
anyway, is that something I can enable with a config file setting, or do they
actually have to trigger it from within their code?
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Thursda
Hi Rob,
> > On Dec 30, 2021, at 4:03 PM, Eric Robinson
> wrote:
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > If I want to ignore the vendor's recommendation and try connection
> pooling anyway, is that something I can enable with a config file setting, or
> do
> the
to me soon hopefully.
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 9:10 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Do I Need Network NameSpaces to Solve This
> Tomcat+Connector/J Problem?
>
> Eric,
>
> On 12/30/21 19:0
We've been seeing problems with failed requests where the response comes back
with duplicate chunked encoding headers:
[Response]
HTTP/1.1 200
Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=86400; includeSubDomains;
Cache-Control: no-cache,no-store
isAuthenticated: true
X-FRAME-OPTIONS: SAMEORIGIN
Transfer-
sending a new message to the list.
>
> You also need to provide some version information.
>
> Mark
>
>
> On 06/07/2023 00:36, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > We've been seeing problems with failed requests where the response comes
> back with duplicate chunked encoding
Greetings,
Many people say the maximum number of client ports is 64K. However, TCP
connections only require unique sockets, which are defined as...
local_IP:local_port -> remote_ip:remote_port
Theoretically, it is possible for a client process to keep using the same local
source port, as long
> -Original Message-
> From: Olaf Kock
> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 2:06 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Does Tomcat/Java get around the problem of 64K maximum
> client source ports?
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> On 26.03.20 18:58, Eric Robinson wrot
, André Warnier (tomcat/perl) wrote:
> > On 27.03.2020 14:27, André Warnier (tomcat/perl) wrote:
> >> On 26.03.2020 20:42, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >>>> -Original Message- From: Olaf Kock
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 2:06 PM
> >&g
> -Original Message-
> From: André Warnier (tomcat/perl)
> Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2020 5:35 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Does Tomcat/Java get around the problem of 64K maximum
> client source ports?
>
> On 27.03.2020 21:39, Eric Robinson wrot
It is my understanding that the AccessLogValve %D field records the time from
when the last byte of the client's request is received to when the last byte of
the server's response is placed on the wire. Is that correct? If so, would TCP
retransmissions impact the timer? If there are connectivity
NED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Eric,
>
> On 9/8/20 13:46, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > It is my understanding that the AccessLogValve %D field records the
> > time from when the last byte of the client's request is received to
> > when the last byte of the server&#x
m: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 3:34 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Tomcat Processing Timer Question
>
> On 08/09/2020 21:19, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Hi Mark and Christopher,
> >
> > For clarification, suppose a client sends and HTTP P
5 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Tomcat Processing Timer Question
>
> On 08/09/2020 21:46, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Hi Mark --
> >
> > "If the request is split across multiple packets the timer starts when
> > Tomcat
> reads the first byte o
gt; -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:41 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Tomcat Processing Timer Question
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Eric,
>
> On 9/8/20 17:29,
Processing Timer Question
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Eric,
>
> On 9/9/20 20:42, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Hi Chris --
> >
> >> Are you have any specific problem you are trying to diagnose or fix?
> >> Or are you just ac
istopher Schultz
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 3:11:43 PM
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Re: Tomcat Processing Timer Question
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Eric,
On 9/10/20 15:29, Eric Robinson wrote:
> Chris --
>
>
>> You should also look at worker-th
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2020, 02:57 Eric Robinson
> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what you mean by measuring at the load balancer level.
> > We're using the jasper logs and those only exist on the tomcat server
> > itself. I must be misunderstanding your meaning.
> >
&g
Has anyone ever seen a situation where tomcat occasionally fails to send
responses but still logs them?
On a CentOS 7.5 server running in Azure with tomcat 7.0.76 with java 1.0.0_221,
everything runs fine 99.99% of the time, but that last hundredth of a percent
is a bitch. However, intermittent
Hi Mark --
Those are great questions. See answers below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 2:20 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 16/10/2020 00:27, Eric Robinson
> > 6. What timeouts are configured for the Connector?
> >
>
> Sorry, which connector are you referring to?
>
Sorry, I'm a dummy. Obviously you mean the tomcat connector.
connectionTimeout="2"
-Eric
Disclaimer : This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended sole
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 5:17 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 16/10/2020 10:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Hi Mark --
> >
> > Those
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 8:02 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 16/10/2020 12:37, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> From: Mark Thomas
>
>
>
> >> I
Hi Mark --
Thanks tons for digging into this. See my answers below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 5:09 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Hi Eric (and those following along),
>
> Eric sent me some
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 7:09 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Hi Mark --
>
> Thanks tons for digging into this. See my answers below.
>
> > -Origina
> On 26/10/2020 10:26, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 24/10/2020 01:32, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>>> -Original Message-
> >>>> From: Mark Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> >>>> The failed request:
>
> > On 26/10/2020 10:26, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > > On 24/10/2020 01:32, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>>> -Original Message-
> > >>>> From: Mark Thomas
> > >
> > >
> > >
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 11:37 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> > > On 26/10/2020 10:26, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > > > O
> On 27/10/2020 09:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 27/10/2020 04:43, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>>>>> Any changes in the Nginx configuration in the relevant timescale?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> On 27/10/2020 15:22, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> On 27/10/2020 09:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
> >>> On 27/10/2020 04:43, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>> Any changes in the Nginx configuration in t
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 12:06 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 27/10/2020 16:29, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> On 27/10/2020 15:22, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
>
>
> >>> I
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 11:33 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> > From: Mark Thomas
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 12:06 PM
> > To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: We
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2020 5:45 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 28/10/2020 20:32, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>
>
> > I have the off-list mail and will start looking at the logs shortly.
>
> Pr
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Sunday, November 1, 2020 11:50 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 01/11/2020 16:25, Mark Thomas wrote:
> >
> >
> > Keeping the previous logs for reference:
> >
> >>> Source Time
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 5:38 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 02/11/2020 11:18, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Mark Thomas
> >> Se
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 2:06 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 02/11/2020 12:16, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
>
>
> > Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. Let's see what happens when t
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 8:21 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> > From: Mark Thomas
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 2:06 AM
> > To: Tomcat Users Li
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 9:26 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Eric,
>
> On 11/3/20 10:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Eric Robins
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2020 11:39 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 03/11/2020 15:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> From: Eric Robinson
> >>> From: Mark Thomas
>
>
>
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Mayr
> Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 4:24 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Am 03.11.2020 um 16:05 schrieb Eric Robinson:
> >> -Original Message-
> >>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Stefan Mayr
> > Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 4:24 PM
> > To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
> >
> > Am 03.11.2020 um 16:05 schrieb Eric Robinson:
> > >>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 5:59 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Eric,
>
> Time to prune the history and provide another summary I think. This
> summary isn't complete. There is more informatio
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 4:08 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List ; Eric Robinson
>
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 11/11/2020 22:48, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 3:06 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 12/11/2020 14:19, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> From: Mark Thomas
>
>
>
> >>
and
> Kernel.
>
> Paul
Paul, this message went to spam and I just found it!
I will try this suggestion immediately.
-Eric
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:16 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> > On 16/10/2020 10:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > > Hi Mark --
> >
> From: Thomas Meyer
> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 9:37 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List ; Mark Thomas
> ; users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
>
>
> Am 13. November 2020 10:06:18 MEZ schrieb Mark Thomas
> :
> >On 12/11/2020 14
lol, and there I was feeling ignored :-)
> >
> > That was the first thing I would have looked at. Is the OS reporting
> > errors to the JVM writing data or is the JVM not writing the data.
> > Strace will tell you this quite easily.
> >
> >
> > On Fri
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 3:03 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 13/11/2020 23:46, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > Eric sent me a copy of the strace (thanks Eric) and while it is
> > consistent w
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 4:34 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 18/11/2020 16:28, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 18/11/2020 15:41, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
>
>
> >>I tested
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 3:17 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 19/11/2020 16:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 19/11/2020 15:55, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 9:32 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 20/11/2020 14:55, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> From: Mark Thomas
> >> It looks like y
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 8:11 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Mark,
>
> On 11/20/20 11:08, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 20/11/2020 15:43, Eric Robins
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 8:57 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 24/11/2020 14:11, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> > On 11/20/20 11:08, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>
>
> >> A second look at the str
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 10:21 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Mark,
>
> On 11/26/20 05:14, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 26/11/2020 04:57, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
Getting error:
java.net.BindException: Address already in use (Bind failed) :3787
I know how to fix the infamous "Address already in use (Bind failed)" problem
when there is another process already listening on a port. However, I have
confirmed with netstat and fuser that there is no other proc
> From: Martin Grigorov
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 12:45 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Wait... NULL address in java.net.BindException: Address already
> in use (Bind failed) ???
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 19:34 Eric Robinson
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Grigorov
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 2:35 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Wait... NULL address in java.net.BindException: Address already
> in use (Bind failed) ???
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 20:27 Eric Robinso
> On 3/17/21 15:35, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 20:27 Eric Robinson
> wrote:
> >
> >>> From: Martin Grigorov
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 12:45 PM
> >>> To: Tomcat Users List
> >>> Subject: Re: W
Two quick questions.
Question 1:
When tomcat creates a TCP connection to a remote server (for example, a
back-end database) tomcat is acting as the TCP client in that case. Does it use
the IP it is listening on as the source IP for its outbound client connection?
For example, Server1 has three
connector that
tomcat uses.
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2021 3:19 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re-Use TCP Source Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
> Two quick questions.
>
> Question 1:
>
> When tomcat cre
ce Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> It should behave the same way. The socket client application will be assigned
> an ephemeral port.
>
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 9:14 AM Eric Robinson
> wrote:
>
> > I guess I may have answered this question for myself.
me IP that
the connector is configured to listen on.
> -Original Message-
> From: Olaf Kock
> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 3:01 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Re-Use TCP Source Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
>
> On 25.06.21 05:19, Eric Robinson
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
