From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 06:09:31 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 44479 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 06:09:31 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 06:09:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 7821 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 06:09:27 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 7363 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 06:09:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 7352 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 06:09:22 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 06:09:22 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO nm27-vm0.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 06:09:13 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] by nm27.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Mar 2011 06:08:52 -0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] by tm8.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Mar 2011 06:08:52 -0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] by omp1011.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Mar 2011 06:08:52 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 6024 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 06:08:52 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=att.net; s=s1024; t=1298959732; bh=LSVVU8BS3J5JP1dsq9PFIsGAOglc67su7tXg8txo4tw=; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=eRJ/bWnhEcNwv+G/fxHYqwNwgmCF/bxZCDVpF/whIF2sPWpnRfVVF9mjlxR2Ibg6WSPqlXc3fiQVHXQRa1TnZQ6b8nSHxAOupkQzbVyqQZE0jmQ3K9oFg3t8sC4isiDP/dgyFJrcVQAiQcITr+piul3RhCmV64iwVj3fuJKPIhU= Received: from [83.161.120.155] (eric91@example.com with plain) by smtp105.sbc.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Feb 2011 22:08:51 -0800 PST X-Yahoo-SMTP: m2dl79CswBAK07LdA5MOI76YzqWIxY78APePcYjgAy7qa1A746Ur X-YMail-OSG: _GME1tYVM1nblfm09yffqX_Ax5Oyw8J7WIodBt9isIPRFI. EmEb6fse0keUf1kCDYRQW4yqRArA_sx35yUho_SmoG.W1qQ2QArwp_TrPYai OFh02XpUU0EadU8Wev2aZ1uvpDH9AHofLhof7EBRNaJwBiSZ_qnf_RJzV0aN QIw2GM18pgG8mv3fdTaSAPtdJ0pGqikHw5n9Np4Yv3YGULnIG9bZ4fmaf2vR .tvW.Tra7RqlB3mB79tTXPxdOr2K6qMcRQjruYjtucKsb8LDizg3p0DbE9Yj HwE4Gn6mkZXzFJ0CLO2_ZRy87dwGIhjItXeKtnxlijBNVeBVu X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:08:47 -0800 From: Michael McCutcheon <eric91@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Subject: Servlet 3.0 Securty Annotations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does Tomcat 7.0.8 support the Servlet 3.0 security annotations? @RolesAllowed @DeclareRoles @ServletSecurity , etc.? thanks, Mike --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 07:47:47 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 57780 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 07:47:47 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 07:47:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 78636 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 07:47:43 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 78225 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 07:47:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 78215 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 07:47:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:47:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail.inxmail.de) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:47:32 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mail.inxmail.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7C187398 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:47:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=inxmail.de; h= message-id:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:mime-version :in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date:subject:organization :from:received:x-virus-scanned; s=mail20091023; t=1298965630; bh=jfz1qMaGW2mq654OVw5QtCMHRTIfHbUabXoIwF2bGX0=; b=YuK14BNZ8vyP 39wEEbSjB8hg7kasdtFyRo4c6YEs0/NWM98wsoztX3mutsQZ8xW0tKp6Cj0j6Syk S4oa58E/aPTLpkeaLtK886zjkn7AFCJhxuSRQ8I56fZhMgE0h6otKKekbwolBWNM kPUmUM1v37aebifERCh25fc3LEJi1Jg= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian eric91@example.com Received: from dev-rfy-pc.localnet (unknown [83.161.120.155]) by mail.inxmail.de (Postfix) with ESMTP for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:47:10 +0100 (CET) From: Rainer Frey <eric91@example.com> Organization: Inxmail GmbH To: eric91@example.com Subject: Re: Problem with overriding parameters via context.xml Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:47:08 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-25-generic; KDE/4.5.1; x86_64; ; ) References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <eric91@example.com> On Monday 28 February 2011 16:53:00 Mark Thomas wrote: > On 28/02/2011 14:51, Rainer Frey wrote: > > On Friday 25 February 2011 17:21:07 Mark Thomas wrote: > >> 6.0.33 is likely to be several months away. I don't see anything in the > >> change log that is likely to prompt an earlier release. > > > > Ouch. 50700 is an absolute blocker for me. I'm stuck with 6.0.29 because > > of this, and having a useable release with the numerous fixes from > > 6.0.30 would be good. > > What's wrong with 7.0.9? I am in the processing of uploading the files > for the release vote now. The ASF Jira instance has been happily running > 7.0.x since 7.0.6 was announced as stable. I plan to test with Tomcat 7, but some apps did not work well with the beta versions (IIRC because of using incorrect URL mappings that did work in Tomcat 6). Rainer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 08:01:08 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 86125 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 08:01:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 08:01:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 91239 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 08:01:05 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 90566 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 08:01:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 90557 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 08:00:59 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:00:59 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.8 required=5.0 tests=FROM_BLANK_NAME,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO smtp6.freeserve.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:00:49 +0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3j07.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 5A71B300008C for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:00:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3j07.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 4E29D30000A0 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:00:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.homeinbox.net (unknown [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3j07.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 31E2A300008C for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:00:29 +0100 (CET) X-ME-UUID: eric91@example.com Received: from localhost (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 591BAEAA792 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:00:28 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian eric91@example.com Received: from mail.homeinbox.net ([83.161.120.155]) by localhost (mail.homeinbox.net [83.161.120.155]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zev67m61loGj for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:00:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (unknown [83.161.120.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C1B89EAA78A for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:00:23 +0000 (GMT) References: <eric91@example.com> User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: Servlet 3.0 Securty Annotations From: "" <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:00:15 +0000 To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Michael McCutcheon <eric91@example.com> wrote: >Does Tomcat 7.0.8 support the Servlet 3.0 security annotations? > >@RolesAllowed >@DeclareRoles >@ServletSecurity > >, etc.? Yes. Tomcat 7.0.x fully supports the Servlet 3.0 spec. Every release has passed the TCK. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 13:53:32 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 39445 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 13:53:32 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 13:53:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 73536 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 13:53:28 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 73376 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 13:53:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 73367 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 13:53:23 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:53:23 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:53:15 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eric91@example.com>) id 1PuQ0Q-0006sF-Jc for eric91@example.com; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:52:50 +0100 Received: from 83.161.120.155 ([83.161.120.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:52:50 +0100 Received: from lefevrol by 83.161.120.155 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:52:50 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: eric91@example.com From: Olivier Lefevre <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: Getting the Tomcat shutdown port Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:52:32 +0100 Lines: 14 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: eric91@example.com X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.161.120.155 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> On 2/28/2011 8:18 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/security/SecurityListener.java?view=annotate This is brand new, isn't it? I can't find it in the 7.0.8 sources. So it may throw a eric91@example.com.BEFORE_INIT_EVENT time but what happens then? I read §10.9 and §11.6 and it only talks about the user-configurable exception handling: it does not seem to specify what the application server may do internally. Besides it is talking about errors that occur much later in the life cycle. So, is the whole Tomcat supposed to die if you throw at BEFORE_INIT_EVENT? -- O.L. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 13:58:06 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 41875 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 13:58:06 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 13:58:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 82105 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 13:58:03 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 81611 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 13:58:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 81602 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 13:57:59 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:57:59 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:57:57 +0000 Received: (qmail 41842 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 13:57:36 -0000 Received: from localhost.apache.org (HELO [83.161.120.155]) (83.161.120.155) (smtp-auth username markt, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:57:36 +0000 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:57:27 +0000 From: Mark Thomas <eric91@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-GB; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: Getting the Tomcat shutdown port References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 01/03/2011 13:52, Olivier Lefevre wrote: > On 2/28/2011 8:18 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/catalina/security/SecurityListener.java?view=annotate >> > > This is brand new, isn't it? I can't find it in the 7.0.8 sources. Yes. > So it may throw a eric91@example.com.BEFORE_INIT_EVENT > time but what happens then? I read §10.9 and §11.6 and it only > talks about the user-configurable exception handling: it does not > seem to specify what the application server may do internally. > Besides it is talking about errors that occur much later in the > life cycle. So, is the whole Tomcat supposed to die if you throw > at BEFORE_INIT_EVENT? Providing you throw an Error, Tomcat is guaranteed not to start. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 14:00:22 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 44009 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:00:21 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:00:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 93063 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:00:18 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 92629 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:00:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 92612 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 14:00:12 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:00:12 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:00:05 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eric91@example.com>) id 1PuQ75-0001yy-Cq for eric91@example.com; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:59:43 +0100 Received: from 83.161.120.155 ([83.161.120.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:59:43 +0100 Received: from lefevrol by 83.161.120.155 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:59:43 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: eric91@example.com From: Olivier Lefevre <eric91@example.com> Subject: Vetoing the start of a webapp Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:59:21 +0100 Lines: 19 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: eric91@example.com X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.161.120.155 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 This is a follow-up on an earlier thread on killing a eric91@example.com. To recap., this is best done by throwing a suitable exception in its init method, as per §83.161.120.155 of the servlet spec. But what if the webapp has several servlets and you want to abort (or undo) the loading of the whole collection if any of the members fail to load: is there already an accepted best practice for that? I note that unlike the servlet the web app is not reified in the API (AFAICT): the ServletContext is in web app scope but it *is* not a webapp (or is it?). Thus it doesn't look like you can control a web app as directly as you can control a servlet. Thanks again, -- O.L. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 14:16:20 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 7715 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:16:19 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:16:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 27707 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:16:16 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 27387 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:16:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 27374 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 14:16:09 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:16:09 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail37.messagelabs.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:16:00 +0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: eric91@example.com X-Msg-Ref: server-2.tower-37.messagelabs.com!1298988934!73044675!17 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [83.161.120.155] Received: (qmail 6022 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:15:38 -0000 Received: from naedge.unisys.com (HELO USEA-NAEDGE2.unisys.com) (83.161.120.155) by server-2.tower-37.messagelabs.com with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:15:38 -0000 Received: from usea-nahubcas1.na.uis.unisys.com (83.161.120.155) by USEA-NAEDGE2.unisys.com (83.161.120.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 83.161.120.155; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:15:03 -0600 Received: from USEA-EXCH8.na.uis.unisys.com ([83.161.120.155]) by usea-nahubcas1.na.uis.unisys.com ([83.161.120.155]) with mapi; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:15:04 -0600 From: "Caldarale, Charles R" <eric91@example.com> To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:14:56 -0600 Subject: RE: Vetoing the start of a webapp Thread-Topic: Vetoing the start of a webapp Thread-Index: AcvYGQVPBe7EKh7pRu+FjCZNaZl7PgAAVAIg Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 > From: Olivier Lefevre [mailto:eric91@example.com]=20 > Subject: Vetoing the start of a webapp > But what if the webapp has several servlets and you > want to abort (or undo) the loading of the whole > collection if any of the members fail to load: is > there already an accepted best practice for that? Normally, you would put such conditional activation code in a ServletContex= tListener, and have it throw an exception if things are not to your liking.= Doing so would prevent any further use of the webapp. If you must do thi= s on a servlet by servlet basis, then any servlet detecting a problem could= set a flag in the ServletContext, which could be checked by a filter to se= e whether or not to allow requests through. > the ServletContext is in web app scope but it *is*=20 > not a webapp (or is it?). There is a one-to-one correspondence between a ServletContext and a webapp;= see SRV9.2: "The servlet container must enforce a one to one correspondence between a W= eb application and a ServletContext. A ServletContext object provides a ser= vlet with its view of the application." - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MA= TERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received = this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its atta= chments from all computers. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 14:27:59 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 47796 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:27:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:27:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 46886 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:27:55 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 46574 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:27:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 46565 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 14:27:50 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:27:50 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.8 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-vw0-f45.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:27:45 +0000 Received: by vws19 with SMTP id 19so5770521vws.18 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 06:27:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=eisOjQGzfJBnrkKM5+AcCt/x+fqIeNVsxXOD/BI8A/I=; b=qSchKMtyoa5yCfGB+agSzB4DD4W7N6sNWw7v2IGwxsrfWmpN4ZAPvr6YDx9/y0hVjh ZbrCu+fx1NLzg3mXiDeDSy0kIYmiBOeWxLgp+1qjMbzu9zcGqy/x7sus8DQkz6EWxyXK rjJ/2NtAhEiGSw77nPCPpG4EnzzwpPlQyCqwU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; b=s11fxPOhyiWV4bGwa1x1Heer7c9gPr3C/U7eM/1z+/UnvbG9aRIGkD/sv50b8mq2l9 7z6Yi1npuiol/OTCKPpSVrZl1oOExbFRI4ZmFcXdhkgRFi8xCD+pjzvcDgUNGP/iBbUn GukScz7vdZwTg6wp+WoVLRLIIwG+F6Ku02YL4= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id wt4mr11159952vdb.31.1298989042527; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 06:17:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 06:17:02 -0800 (PST) From: Rodrigo Asensio <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:17:02 -0500 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Subject: weird memory To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec53f92bb744c0c049d6c7473 --bcaec53f92bb744c0c049d6c7473 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello. my platform Debian 5 Tomcat 6 with authbind as described here http://blogs.mulesoft.org/a-better-tomcat-for-ubuntu-and-debian/ <http://blogs.mulesoft.org/a-better-tomcat-for-ubuntu-and-debian/>now.. I'm starting the tomcat with Xmx700m and the /mananger/html shows only 12x as max Free memory: 33.84 MB Total memory: 81.06 MB Max memory: 125.93 MB But in the server, the java process (using top) shows that it consumes up to 700m, which is OK. But.. the past few days it started to fail when memory eater request run (never happened before) Is tomcat running really with 128mb instead my 700m ? Does anyone have an idea about this issue ? Regards --------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.rodrigoasensio.com --bcaec53f92bb744c0c049d6c7473-- From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 14:48:02 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 23888 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:48:01 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:48:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 85216 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:47:58 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 84639 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:47:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 84621 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 14:47:53 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:47:53 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:47:45 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eric91@example.com>) id 1PuQr5-0006Ps-9v for eric91@example.com; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:47:15 +0100 Received: from 83.161.120.155 ([83.161.120.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:47:15 +0100 Received: from lefevrol by 83.161.120.155 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:47:15 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: eric91@example.com From: Olivier Lefevre <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: Getting the Tomcat shutdown port Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:46:57 +0100 Lines: 8 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: eric91@example.com X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.161.120.155 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> On 3/1/2011 2:57 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > Providing you throw an Error, Tomcat is guaranteed not to start. OK! Just to be 100% clear, this is a Tomcat thing, not a servlet spec thing, right? Just wondering whether it's portable. -- O.L. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 14:52:18 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 41921 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:52:18 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:52:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 97418 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:52:14 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 97009 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:52:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 96998 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 14:52:09 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:52:09 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:52:08 +0000 Received: (qmail 41699 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 14:51:47 -0000 Received: from localhost.apache.org (HELO [83.161.120.155]) (83.161.120.155) (smtp-auth username markt, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:51:47 +0000 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:51:39 +0000 From: Mark Thomas <eric91@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-GB; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: Getting the Tomcat shutdown port References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/03/2011 14:46, Olivier Lefevre wrote: > On 3/1/2011 2:57 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> Providing you throw an Error, Tomcat is guaranteed not to start. > > OK! Just to be 100% clear, this is a Tomcat thing, not a servlet > spec thing, right? Just wondering whether it's portable. Yes, this is Tomcat specific. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 14:55:28 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 42958 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:26 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:55:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 8960 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:22 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 8219 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 8188 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:14 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:55:14 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:55:06 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eric91@example.com>) id 1PuQy9-0003Vr-CH for eric91@example.com; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:54:33 +0100 Received: from 83.161.120.155 ([83.161.120.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:54:33 +0100 Received: from lefevrol by 83.161.120.155 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:54:33 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: eric91@example.com From: Olivier Lefevre <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: Vetoing the start of a webapp Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:54:07 +0100 Lines: 19 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: eric91@example.com X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.161.120.155 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> On 3/1/2011 3:14 PM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote: > Normally, you would put such conditional activation code in a > ServletContextListener, and have it throw an exception if things > are not to your liking. Doing so would prevent any further use > of the webapp. OK but I have the same question as to Mark Thomas in the other thread: is this Tomcat-specific or is it spelled out in the servlet spec somewhere? > There is a one-to-one correspondence between a ServletContext > and a webapp; see SRV9.2: Yes but that does not make ServletContext a stand-in for webapps: it just means it that servlet contexts have webapp scope. Or, if you prefer, there is no javax.servlet.WebApp class like there is a javax.servlet.Servlet. -- O.L. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 14:55:47 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 43295 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:46 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:55:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 12981 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:43 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 12799 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 12788 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:39 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:55:39 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail51.messagelabs.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:55:29 +0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: eric91@example.com X-Msg-Ref: server-3.tower-51.messagelabs.com!1298991307!83087269!2 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [83.161.120.155] Received: (qmail 26210 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:55:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO USEA-NAEDGE1.unisys.com) (83.161.120.155) by server-3.tower-51.messagelabs.com with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:55:08 -0000 Received: from usea-nahubcas1.na.uis.unisys.com (83.161.120.155) by USEA-NAEDGE1.unisys.com (83.161.120.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 83.161.120.155; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:54:15 -0600 Received: from USEA-EXCH8.na.uis.unisys.com ([83.161.120.155]) by usea-nahubcas1.na.uis.unisys.com ([83.161.120.155]) with mapi; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:54:15 -0600 From: "Caldarale, Charles R" <eric91@example.com> To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:54:07 -0600 Subject: RE: Getting the Tomcat shutdown port Thread-Topic: Getting the Tomcat shutdown port Thread-Index: AcvYH7HNk0r5VZa8SW6KfZ+bSrvXFwAAIlog Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 > From: Olivier Lefevre [mailto:eric91@example.com]=20 > Subject: Re: Getting the Tomcat shutdown port > Just to be 100% clear, this is a Tomcat thing, not a servlet > spec thing, right? Just wondering whether it's portable. Anything using an org.apache class is Tomcat-specific, and therefore not po= rtable. - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MA= TERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received = this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its atta= chments from all computers. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 15:00:17 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 45146 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 15:00:17 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 15:00:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 21092 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 15:00:14 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 20664 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 15:00:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 20655 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 15:00:08 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:00:08 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail37.messagelabs.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:59:57 +0000 X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: eric91@example.com X-Msg-Ref: server-9.tower-37.messagelabs.com!1298991574!86453241!3 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.9; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [83.161.120.155] Received: (qmail 19218 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 14:59:35 -0000 Received: from naedge.unisys.com (HELO USEA-NAEDGE2.unisys.com) (83.161.120.155) by server-9.tower-37.messagelabs.com with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 14:59:35 -0000 Received: from usea-nahubcas1.na.uis.unisys.com (83.161.120.155) by USEA-NAEDGE2.unisys.com (83.161.120.155) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 83.161.120.155; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:58:58 -0600 Received: from USEA-EXCH8.na.uis.unisys.com ([83.161.120.155]) by usea-nahubcas1.na.uis.unisys.com ([83.161.120.155]) with mapi; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:58:59 -0600 From: "Caldarale, Charles R" <eric91@example.com> To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:58:51 -0600 Subject: RE: Vetoing the start of a webapp Thread-Topic: Vetoing the start of a webapp Thread-Index: AcvYILRlPSsroGNjTLiaPq8mYRi6RAAACnyQ Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > From: Olivier Lefevre [mailto:eric91@example.com]=20 > Subject: Re: Vetoing the start of a webapp > is this Tomcat-specific or is it spelled out in the > servlet spec somewhere? It's in the servlet spec. > Yes but that does not make ServletContext a stand-in=20 > for webapps: Actually, it does; that's the meaning of "one-to-one correspondence". - Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MA= TERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received = this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its atta= chments from all computers. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 15:20:45 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 15739 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 15:20:45 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 15:20:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 50952 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 15:20:41 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 50135 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 15:20:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 50113 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 15:20:35 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:20:35 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:20:27 +0000 Received: from omta23.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([83.161.120.155]) by qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id DrDU1g0041c6gX859rL658; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:20:06 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by omta23.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id DrL01g00Z38FjT13jrL3o0; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:20:05 +0000 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:20:01 -0500 From: Christopher Schultz <eric91@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: weird memory References: <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rodrigo, On 3/1/2011 9:17 AM, Rodrigo Asensio wrote: > Debian 5 > Tomcat 6 with authbind as described here > http://blogs.mulesoft.org/a-better-tomcat-for-ubuntu-and-debian/ > > <http://blogs.mulesoft.org/a-better-tomcat-for-ubuntu-and-debian/>now.. I'm > starting the tomcat with Xmx700m and the /mananger/html shows only 12x as > max What does "12x max" mean? > Free memory: 33.84 MB Total memory: 81.06 MB Max memory: 125.93 MB > > But in the server, the java process (using top) shows that it consumes up to > 700m, which is OK. Top shows more than the heap size, which is what you are setting when you use the -Xm settings. > But.. the past few days it started to fail when memory > eater request run (never happened before) > > Is tomcat running really with 128mb instead my 700m ? Does anyone have an > idea about this issue ? Looks like it. Try this: $ ps aux | grep catalina This should show you the complete command-line for launching Tomcat, including all JVM settings provided on the command-line. For instance, mine looks like this: cschultz 11436 0.0 1.1 244100 83280 pts/3 Sl Feb01 16:58 /usr/bin/java -Dnop -Xmx64M - -Djava.util.logging.manager=org.apache.juli.ClassLoaderLogManager - -Dorg.apache.catalina.STRICT_SERVLET_COMPLIANCE=true - -Djava.endorsed.dirs=/home/cschultz/projects/apache-tomcat-7.0.x/trunk/output/build/endorsed - -classpath /home/cschultz/projects/apache-tomcat-7.0.x/trunk/output/build/bin/bootstrap.jar:/home/cschultz/projects/apache-tomcat-7.0.x/trunk/output/build/bin/tomcat-juli.jar - -Dcatalina.base=/home/cschultz/.webapps/multipart/8275 - -Dcatalina.home=/home/cschultz/projects/apache-tomcat-7.0.x/trunk/output/build - -Djava.io.tmpdir=/home/cschultz/.webapps/multipart/8275/temp org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap start You can see that I have specified "-Xmx64M" somewhere in my configuration. Check to see if your command-line has that type of configuration in there. If it's not there, then you have not configured Tomcat as you think you have. Are you using Debian's Tomcat 6 package, or are you running one downloaded directly from the Apache web site? If you are using Debian's package, there are a lot of config files and scripts that run that might be either overriding your settings, or you may not be editing the right file. - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1tDqAACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PAqmACeMvWUAYmrZNhkgOUqicRa/xEu +CUAn0UqG3Rw3MjOqJonrcEO/anE9PmT =qaqJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 15:29:51 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 45504 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 15:29:50 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 15:29:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 68983 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 15:29:47 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 68469 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 15:29:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 68449 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 15:29:42 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:29:42 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:29:35 +0000 Received: from omta17.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([83.161.120.155]) by qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id DqRc1g0061afHeLADrVEs8; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:29:14 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by omta17.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id DrVA1g00j38FjT18drVCQN; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:29:13 +0000 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:29:11 -0500 From: Christopher Schultz <eric91@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: [OT] IIS7/isapi/tomcat performance References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tony, On 2/28/2011 2:57 PM, Tony Anecito wrote: > Since the memory pointers are larger you may need to increase your heap size but > you can compress the address pointers. +1 > Also, if you use JNI and it is 32-bit then you will have unexpected issues same > thing with any native libs your try to use. +1 > Generally it will be up to 20% slower due to the pointers. Can you explain that claim? Unless the OP is using compressed pointers (which will require a decode in order to dereference), why would the performance drop when using 64-bit pointers instead of 32-bit pointers. Presumably, the CPU has 64-bit (or bigger) registers and can handle 64-bit numbers just as fast as 32-bit numbers. Or do modern CPUs run in g a32-bit mode where the hardware doesn't bother to add-out to the 33+ bits? - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1tEMcACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PBa8ACgmRjggPsYHma8tShCNK2WfOJd Qv8AoJ0KGEVwKQRDfSvwAvoF2Is5oHoW =Anih -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 15:32:32 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 59249 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 15:32:31 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 15:32:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 76249 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 15:32:28 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 75979 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 15:32:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 75970 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 15:32:24 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:32:24 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO qmta06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:32:17 +0000 Received: from omta21.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([83.161.120.155]) by qmta06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id DrTH1g0051u4NiLA6rXw8T; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:31:56 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by omta21.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id DrXs1g00v38FjT18hrXube; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 15:31:54 +0000 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:31:54 -0500 From: Christopher Schultz <eric91@example.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: IIS7/isapi/tomcat performance References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tony, On 2/28/2011 4:21 PM, Tony Anecito wrote: > I also use Native APR with Tomcat 7 which eliminates AJP and > supposedly is faster than Apache Web Server It's probably the same as AWS, as the code is the same :) > http://people.apache.org/~schultz/ApacheCon%20NA%202010/ApacheCon%20NA%202010%20Slides.pdf - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1tEWoACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PBaUgCff8BC8ctr6IRNz0822wepdyxN 47sAn15U0Sy3O9mUAk1roW2M8vAjV3Z2 =r51s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 16:31:08 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 47409 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 16:31:07 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 16:31:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 65817 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 16:31:04 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 65064 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 16:31:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 65049 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 16:30:59 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:30:59 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:30:52 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eric91@example.com>) id 1PuSSz-0001GY-0K for eric91@example.com; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:30:29 +0100 Received: from 83.161.120.155 ([83.161.120.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:30:28 +0100 Received: from lefevrol by 83.161.120.155 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:30:28 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: eric91@example.com From: Olivier Lefevre <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: Getting the Tomcat shutdown port Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:30:07 +0100 Lines: 11 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: eric91@example.com X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.161.120.155 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> On 3/1/2011 3:54 PM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote: > Anything using an org.apache class is Tomcat-specific, and > therefore not portable. Oh, right. I had not picked up that LifecycleListener itself is a Catalina class. Still, the basic issue is not about the listener per se but how the app server reacts to an Error thrown during initialization. -- O.L. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 16:42:09 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 87514 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 16:42:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 16:42:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 98807 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 16:42:05 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 98246 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 16:42:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 98237 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 16:42:01 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:42:01 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:41:52 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eric91@example.com>) id 1PuSdg-0007RX-2c for eric91@example.com; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:41:32 +0100 Received: from 83.161.120.155 ([83.161.120.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:41:32 +0100 Received: from lefevrol by 83.161.120.155 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:41:32 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: eric91@example.com From: Olivier Lefevre <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: Vetoing the start of a webapp Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:41:14 +0100 Lines: 6 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: eric91@example.com X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.161.120.155 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > It's in the servlet spec. Sorry, can you give me the actual section: are you referring to §11.6? -- O.L. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 16:49:53 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 30161 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 16:49:53 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 16:49:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 12956 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 16:49:49 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 12631 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 16:49:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 12620 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 16:49:47 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:49:47 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-gw0-f44.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:49:40 +0000 Received: by gwaa18 with SMTP id a18so2424365gwa.3 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:49:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=dtAPrUdU7gi6iq8FWNo97yyMSV/XLjt8ruPyXnbDLhM=; b=MEyzEJg9ldh1hEYmGY3y9lvGnuOmyge/lscabAREYJrc6GX6HP9tvtT28EfybFxkvE 4hRCIjqzYxK8+gSmvaPhNHIHMmfOOdHl/lOeI/Oq7/mGLSSk77JLbVRIHL+knBmVnBFi qFIQJauyvQH3urinWvCDpyvSLMe6+oD2kMcoY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=I2q/RcFzLxxCHJ1osISextNh3Zgp5o07EGpDuMJK1PBr6VAc6Pkxe1AlYVfxp7fooE LGKxqvhCAH8vyrPXJybWOW+Hpn+itVO/7GGVYBKLfnAUcFw+8vrq0QK4LXlSE1PFCiLf Wml+O3MS+1ijCkVUpuUPmg/ulUIMmAQZRp424= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id c9mr6895111ict.414.1298998159493; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:49:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:49:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 17:49:19 +0100 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Subject: Bug 49914 or I can't map to / anymore? From: Leon Rosenberg <eric91@example.com> To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 hi, concerning https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49914. I have a filter which listens on /. This filter is used to manage different welcome pages for different urls on a multiurl site. It works like in (pseudocode) if (req.getServerName().equals("bla")) forward to blurp; if (req.getServerName().startsWith("specialoffer")) forward to xyz; and so on. With tomcat 7 it stopped to work due to above bug. Now the bug is set to won't fix, how can we achieve same behavior without the mapping? regards Leon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 17:00:56 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 40693 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 17:00:55 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 17:00:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 31864 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 17:00:51 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 31478 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 17:00:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 31469 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 17:00:47 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:00:47 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO sam.nabble.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:00:42 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([83.161.120.155]) by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eric91@example.com>) id 1PuSvt-0002GR-LM for eric91@example.com; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 09:00:21 -0800 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:00:21 -0800 (PST) From: Gehrny <eric91@example.com> To: eric91@example.com Subject: Put URL in context.xml MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: eric91@example.com My webapp performs HTTP POST requests to another site. I would like to store the URL and the port of the remote site in the context.xml. How could I do this? So far I have added the following to the context.xml: <Resource name="http/mprm" auth="Container" type="java.net.HttpURLConnection;" url="http://remotehost:8080"/> -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Put-URL-in-context.xml-tp31041581p31041581.html Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list eric91@example.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 17:03:53 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 66702 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 17:03:53 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 17:03:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 36697 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 17:03:48 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 36459 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 17:03:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 36442 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 17:03:45 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:03:45 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eric91@example.com designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-yx0-f173.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:03:39 +0000 Received: by yxk8 with SMTP id 8so2711232yxk.18 for <eric91@example.com>; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 09:03:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VmVMVYx5RSL5Y5doWDh4QSdKy6rCFa5sglVUDAMWo+k=; b=O1QAICi2BV6UlNTJybjiULtx4eBvlxXiY/b7jL/+m2hBX+fVADvq3TIDL7AcrbutpK n4Q+aQ1uOhgd0t6imc9f9rEe8zOHWxWTIGan7nNVbHzLxVmlhLwNFe+uk/wPMUdsbP71 sOCvcfSsKT/eRmkIIyjrtoRYbeU3IbmVZMg8Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dQ3C8a4AadeAg45QhJH5gnssGBOmOft9aCHrfr8JIZkZXlKqbFeHXbLs4x9ieBVUNb a+gzrhdbtRcgT6egnkwmEG7X60EMOuH6PN/qXJj5r1N24aRt1A65HFBveWIRQ7dDXw/U HJ4Kr7lX/115M8leKgj+Q2gsrd//xP10LE9iU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id f16mr9450386agf.202.1298998998109; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 09:03:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:03:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <eric91@example.com> References: <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> <eric91@example.com> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 18:03:18 +0100 Message-ID: <eric91@example.com> Subject: Re: How to disable JSR 250 annotations processor ? From: =?UTF-8?Q?Stevo_Slavi=C4=87?= <eric91@example.com> To: Tomcat Users List <eric91@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just tried, for plain spring managed object which is neither servlet, nor filter nor listener, @PostConstruct method gets called only once on Tomcat 7. Regards, Stevo. On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Stevo Slavi=C4=87 <eric91@example.com> wrot= e: > If I understood spec (servlet-3_0-final-spec.pdf) well, this service > is required only for servlets, filters, and listeners (Table 15-1 > Components and Interfaces supporting Annotations and Dependency > Injection, chapter 15, page 179 of specification, page 201 of pdf). > Yevgen, on which beans did you experience this extra behavior from > Tomcat 7? Were they servlets/filters/listeners or some other spring > managed beans? > > Also, shouldn't it be possible for one to turn off this behavior by > specifying metadata-complete=3Dtrue, in case one doesn't make use of web > fragments and Java EE specified annotation and dependency injection? > > Regards, > Stevo. > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:12 PM, Mark Thomas <eric91@example.com> wrote: >> On 25/02/2011 21:03, Yevgen Krapiva wrote: >>> Hi. >>> >>> I have a problem deploying Spring based application to Tomcat 6.0.26 / >>> 7.0.0. >>> Some of my beans have @PostConstruct annotated methods. >>> Like: >>> >>> @PostConstruct >>> public void init() { ... } >>> >>> The problem is that these methods called twice - first time by Tomcat >>> annotation processor, >>> second time - by Spring. >>> Is it possible to turn off this behavior in Tomcat as I do not really w= ant >>> to rewrite the application >>> to use xml configuration metadata. >> >> Sorry, Tomcat provides no such mechanism. The behaviour is required by >> the servlet specification. >> >> Mark >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com >> For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: eric91@example.com For additional commands, e-mail: eric91@example.com From userseric91@example.com Tue Mar 01 18:46:24 2011 Return-Path: <userseric91@example.com> Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 15917 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2011 18:46:24 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Mar 2011 18:46:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 38091 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 18:46:20 -0000 Delivered-To: eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 37820 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2011 18:46:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact eric91@example.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Post: <mailto:eric91@example.com> List-Id: <users.tomcat.apache.org> Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <eric91@example.com> Delivered-To: mailing list eric91@example.com Received: (qmail 37811 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2011 18:46:16 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Mar 2011 18:46:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org:
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}