Title: RE: Design Review for ajp13's changes: WAS problem w/ ajp13 - if Tomc at is shutdown
This doesn't seem to be a problem on Windows 2000.
I can't reproduce this on Windows 2000, as well.
It must be how the socket works on Windows.
shinta
> -Original Message--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shinta Tjio) writes:
> The reason I didn't do one for Win32 is because I hadn't been able
> to reproduce the problem on Win32, at least Windows 2000. They must
> handle socket differently. I hate to put unnecessary code, especially
> when I can't reproduce it, can't test it and
Title: RE: Design Review for ajp13's changes: WAS problem w/ ajp13 - if Tomc at is shutdown
To keep high performance in this connector, it will be better to
handle
the tomcat restart as an exceptionnal condition ;-)
La prise de conscience de votre propre ignorance est un grand
pas ve
Title: RE: Design Review for ajp13's changes: WAS problem w/ ajp13 - if Tomc at is shutdown
> > 3) For option (1), I have a few questions
> >
> > - Is there a way in which data could be lost? Specifically,
> >as you state,
> >the send() will return w
>First off, it's GREAT that you are working on this -- it's a
>very heavily requested improvement.
> 1) This work will end up being committed in the 3.3 branch,
>rather than the
>3.2 branch. 3.2 is only bug fixes now, not new features. The
>mod_jk C code
>is very similar in 3.3 and 3.2, but
Title: RE: Design Review for ajp13's changes: WAS problem w/ ajp13 - if Tomc at is shutdown
Dan,
thanks for reviewing See my inline comments.
> First off, it's GREAT that you are working on this -- it's a
> very heavily requested improvement.
>
> I ha
EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 6:57 PM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED] '
> > Subject: Re: Design Review for ajp13's changes: WAS problem w/ ajp13 -
> > if Tomc at is shutdown
> >
> >
> > Hi Shinta
Title: RE: Design Review for ajp13's changes: WAS problem w/ ajp13 - if Tomc at is shutdown
Attached are the unified diffs for the proposed changes.
They are diffs against the 3.2.1 release code. I hope this
is sufficient. I haven't got to use Solaris patch tool yet.
These are
