- Original Message -
From: "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: How strongly Tomcat 5.5.x will be committed to JDK 1.4.x in
future..
> The current servlet spec doesn't requires J2SE 5.0 - only
The current servlet spec doesn't requires J2SE 5.0 - only the next one (
another stupid forced, unjustified transition IMO ).
I would assume JDK1.4 will be supported for a while, as long as the
current version of the servlet spec is in use.
Tomcat3.3, which supports JDK1.1, has been maintained
Hi,
Tomcat 5.5 will always allow JDK 1.4. Tomcat 6.0, as required by the J2EE 5
specifications, will require J2SE 5.0. I repeat, for emphasis, that this is
required by the J2EE 5 Specification itself, which Tomcat 6.0 will support: it
is not our decision to drop support for JDK 1.4.
Yoav
--- Gi
Hi,
We'r puzzled between tomcat 5.0.x and 5.5.x.
Due to our product restrictions we can't use JDK 1.5. Looked at jakarta web
site, it seems that using tomcat 5.5.x seriese compated to 5.0.x is a good idea
and recommended.
Before committing our product to tomcat 5.5.9, I want to know how much
Costin Manolache wrote:
Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
My opinion is that NIO is going to be really useless.
Eh, hello!? Oh, okay if it's not important that Tomcat scale and
perform well it may be useless. But, really, before NIO it was
hopeless to try and wr
would be (for a "NIO-able"
servlet)?
Yoav Shapira
Millennium ChemInformatics
>-Original Message-
>From: Endre Stølsvik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 4:48 AM
>To: Tomcat Developers List
>Subject: Re: 5.next + 4.1.x future
>
>[ a
[ a little late here, but hey.. ]
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, David Rees wrote:
| On Fri, December 12, 2003 at 2:12 pm, Adam Fisk wrote:
| >
| > I'd be happy to send my data to the group if people are interested.
| > Aside from memory, I was surprised to find that the effect on CPU was
| > negligible (n
Costin Manolache wrote:
Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
Don't forget that servlets ( which is the main job of tomcat ) use
blocking input/output streams.
NIO select ( which is what most people see first in NIO ) is not going
to help in this. Select is extremely powerfull - but it requires a
certain
Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
My opinion is that NIO is going to be really useless.
Eh, hello!? Oh, okay if it's not important that Tomcat scale and
perform well it may be useless. But, really, before NIO it was
hopeless to try and write a scalable and f
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Jeanfrancois Arcand wrote:
+1
I would also like to explore, as a separate module, a connector that
uses NIO to see what kind of performance we can have. I have no
intention of replacing the current connector, and probably I will
waste my time trying to have the same perfo
Remy Maucherat wrote:
I'm interested in the following enhancements to 5.0.x in the future (=
in january or later):
- refactoring of the save to XML feature (that's been requested; I don't
know if I'll use that to be able to use the admin webapp under JBoss,
though); likely t
David Rees wrote:
On Fri, December 12, 2003 at 2:12 pm, Adam Fisk wrote:
I'd be happy to send my data to the group if people are interested.
Aside from memory, I was surprised to find that the effect on CPU was
negligible (not much of a benefit from no context-switching between
threads) -- CPU was
Developers List
Subject: Re: 5.next + 4.1.x future
Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
> Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>My opinion is that NIO is going to be really useless.
>
> Eh, hello!? Oh, okay if it's not important that Tomcat scale and
> perform well it
On Fri, December 12, 2003 at 2:12 pm, Adam Fisk wrote:
>
> I'd be happy to send my data to the group if people are interested.
> Aside from memory, I was surprised to find that the effect on CPU was
> negligible (not much of a benefit from no context-switching between
> threads) -- CPU was virtuall
I should also mention that I ran these tests on an Athlon 2200 with
512MB RAM.
-Adam
Adam Fisk wrote:
Here's my excel spreadsheet. All of these numbers are taken from the
Windows Task Manager. This is somewhat misleading in that the memory
numbers don't properly reflect garbage collection,
Here's my excel spreadsheet. All of these numbers are taken from the
Windows Task Manager. This is somewhat misleading in that the memory
numbers don't properly reflect garbage collection, but it's informative
nevertheless.
The "Sends (ms)" column reflects the timeout between client sends. I
Adam Fisk wrote:
Just to chime in on the NIO issue, I agree that it's not immediately
obvious what the performance benefits are. Perhaps more importantly,
though, the code changes to switch Tomcat (or any other good-size app)
to NIO are tremendous -- basically a rewrite of the hard parts.
T
Just to chime in on the NIO issue, I agree that it's not immediately
obvious what the performance benefits are. Perhaps more importantly,
though, the code changes to switch Tomcat (or any other good-size app)
to NIO are tremendous -- basically a rewrite of the hard parts.
That said, I've done
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
My opinion is that NIO is going to be really useless.
Eh, hello!? Oh, okay if it's not important that Tomcat scale and
perform well it may be useless. But, really, before NIO it was
hopeless to try and w
Jan-Henrik Haukeland wrote:
Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
My opinion is that NIO is going to be really useless.
Eh, hello!? Oh, okay if it's not important that Tomcat scale and
perform well it may be useless. But, really, before NIO it was
hopeless to try and write a scalable and fast
Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My opinion is that NIO is going to be really useless.
Eh, hello!? Oh, okay if it's not important that Tomcat scale and
perform well it may be useless. But, really, before NIO it was
hopeless to try and write a scalable and fast tcp server application
i
M
> To: Tomcat Developers List
> Subject: 5.next + 4.1.x future
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I see no reason to create a new branch, which is not what
> happened with
> previous releases, where branches were created sometimes even
> before the
> stable release (4.1.x got fo
Jeanfrancois Arcand wrote:
+1
I would also like to explore, as a separate module, a connector that
uses NIO to see what kind of performance we can have. I have no
intention of replacing the current connector, and probably I will waste
my time trying to have the same performance as the current c
dditional 4.1.x releases (assuming it's a
good one without regressions :D ). If people want more, a new RM will
need to pop up :) (BTW, I can pass the hot potato right now for 4.x if
someone is interested :D )
I'm interested in the following enhancements to 5.0.x in the future (=
in january
ing it's a good one
without regressions :D ). If people want more, a new RM will need to pop
up :) (BTW, I can pass the hot potato right now for 4.x if someone is
interested :D )
I'm interested in the following enhancements to 5.0.x in the future (=
in january or later):
- refac
Ending with something like that would be cool:
http://www.micromata.com/M_tec/schroedinger/index.html
Of course, I don't expect we'll be able to put them out of buisness for
the forseeable future :-D
- Implementing deploy shortcuts with calls to Ant would be relatively easy
- Parsi
>-Original Message-
>From: chris brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 10:54 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Ideas for future versions of Tomcat (a bit controversial
>maybe)?
>
>
>Hello,
>
>I've been trying out JDK 1.4
Oops! Got the tags wrong; the filter names
should match. One more error this week,
but who's counting?
>
>
> XSLT Filter for Skin1
> XSLTFilter
>
> xsltFileName
> skin1.xsl
>
>
>
>
> Skin1Command
> command
>
XSLT Filter for Skin1
XSLTFilter
xsltFileName
skin1.xsl
XSLT
Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
>
> Yep, you've got the pattern down. It's also legal to use
> HttpServletResponseWrapper if you're wrapping HTTP responses. And, of
> course, you can wrap the request if you want to do input filtering, in
> pretty much the same manner.
>
> Craig
>
>
>
Ok, than
pply on the original request -- they do
not get invoked when a servlet or JSP page is accessed through a
RequestDispatcher.
> thanks.
>
Craig
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bob Jamison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:14 AM
>
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Bob Jamison wrote:
> Amy Roh wrote:
>
> > Servlet spec 2.3 has changed to support init(FilterConfig config) and
> > destroy() methods instead of getFilterConfig() and
> > setFilterConfig(FilterConfig config) after discussion to change filter cycle
> > to be similar to the
; From: Bob Jamison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 9:14 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Future of Filter?
>
>
> Amy Roh wrote:
>
> > Servlet spec 2.3 has changed to support init(FilterConfig
> config) and
> > destroy(
Amy Roh wrote:
> Servlet spec 2.3 has changed to support init(FilterConfig config) and
> destroy() methods instead of getFilterConfig() and
> setFilterConfig(FilterConfig config) after discussion to change filter cycle
> to be similar to the servlet life cycle in the expert group. The recent
> c
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Bob Jamison wrote:
> Hey, all, I have a minor question about TC4, if anyone knows,
> cool, if not, oh, well.;-)
>
> (Actually, I am probably just overlooking something obvious)
>
> In the public drafts of 2.3 and in the Tomcat examples, I have
> seen various specifica
in the new Proposed Final Draft 2 (which will be
available to public very soon). So TC4 is up to date with the recent spec.
:-)
Amy
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Jamison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 9:10 AM
Subjec
in the new Proposed Final Draft 2 (which will be
available to public very soon). So TC4 is up to date with the recent spec.
:-)
Amy
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Jamison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 9:10 AM
Subjec
Hey, all, I have a minor question about TC4, if anyone knows,
cool, if not, oh, well.;-)
(Actually, I am probably just overlooking something obvious)
In the public drafts of 2.3 and in the Tomcat examples, I have
seen various specifications of Filter. Is the spec going to
move toward Tomcat
nd something about a "head start" on IIS and Netscape?
This could mean anything... does anyone know the scoop?
Thanks,
Steve
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 7:01 AM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]
l the protocols ( ajp12, ajp13 and jni ) in it.
Ajp14 and the port of mod_webapp are not yet part of mod_jk, but that's
independent of the isapi/nsapi/mod_ layer.
> What is the current future Connector plan for IIS? Will IIS support these
> new protocols anytime soon?
At the same
I noticed that isapi_redirect.dll uses ajp12, but ajp13 is already out (and
better than ajp12), and there are talks of ajp14 and mod_webapp and other
new Connector
ideas...
What is the current future Connector plan for IIS? Will IIS support these
new
protocols anytime soon?
Thanks,
Steve
Another overwhelming diplomacy lesson... I guess.
Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar
> -Original Message-
> From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 01:21
> To: tomcat-dev
> Subject: future questions
>
>
> Lets see how many of these
on 12/21/2000 1:44 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Speaking of future, the same thing can happen when the next servlet spec
>>> is released - and again you could use tomcat3.3 to have a smooth future.
>>> I know how painfull it i
> > Speaking of future, the same thing can happen when the next servlet spec
> > is released - and again you could use tomcat3.3 to have a smooth future.
> > I know how painfull it is to upgrade a production server - how many small
> > things will stop working and many
Hi again, Jon.
> I downloaded the latest J2EE and it includes Tomcat. However, when I looked
> on your website, it says that you have two versions of Tomcat. Which one
> comes with J2EE? Which one should I be using?
I'm sure J2EE will have a README telling you what version it includes.
As for "
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 1+
>
> The problem, of course, is that the critical functionality is evolving so
> rapidly, that most "users" prefer the developer list, since that is where
> the action is. This is the downside of a Open Source project such as Tomcat
> (as opposed to the Apache Server
> From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> on 12/19/2000 4:26 PM, "David Rees" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > How about forwarding them or pointing them to the tomcat-user list where
> > these questions will be answered?
>
> Because not everyone wants to subscribe to a mailing list to ju
"David Rees"
c.com> cc:
Subject: RE:
on 12/19/2000 4:26 PM, "David Rees" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How about forwarding them or pointing them to the tomcat-user list where
> these questions will be answered?
>
> -Dave
Because not everyone wants to subscribe to a mailing list to just get a
simple question answered.
-jon
> From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> p.s. Costin, I had a great idea. I'm going to forward to you all of the
> personal email based Tomcat support questions that I get. Have
> fun answering
> them. :-)
How about forwarding them or pointing them to the tomcat-user list where
these q
Lets see how many of these questions come up in the future by users:
I downloaded the latest J2EE and it includes Tomcat. However, when I looked
on your website, it says that you have two versions of Tomcat. Which one
comes with J2EE? Which one should I be using?
I found a bug in 3.3. When is
50 matches
Mail list logo
